Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Palins bookFollow

#27 Nov 18 2009 at 12:24 PM Rating: Good
The AP employs 4,300 reporters worldwide. I'm sure they could spare 11 for the week it took them to do this, especially since the elections are over.
#28 Nov 18 2009 at 12:44 PM Rating: Default
Quote:
When the former Republican vice presidential candidate and former Alaska governor wrote her autobiography, the AP found a copy before its release date and assigned 11 people to fact check all 432 pages.


I see no reason to be surprised over this. At this point when there are still plenty of people eager to hate on the Republicans its makes more sense for a business to go after them than Democrats. Why fact check Obama and not only be put on his enemies list but also get less readers?
#29 Nov 18 2009 at 12:55 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
539 posts

Quote:
At this point when there are still plenty of people eager to hate on the Republicans its makes more sense for a business to go after them than Democrats.


I think you're assuming that plenty of people DONT have a reason to hate on the Republicans. You're also confusing "business" "sense" with common sense. If 2 unending wars, obstruction to any agenda for the sake of scoring political points, 8 years of someone named Bush and his relentless obfuscations and scandals, stoking the flames of right-wing hatemongers, continuous racism and homophobia, and so on aren't a reason to "hate on Republican[t]s", I'm not quite sure what is.
____________________________
"Citing your sources isn't spoon feeding, it's basic 101 if you're making an argument."-Jophiel
#30 Nov 18 2009 at 1:01 PM Rating: Default
Quote:
I think you're assuming that plenty of people DONT have a reason to hate on the Republicans. You're also confusing "business" "sense" with common sense. If 2 unending wars, obstruction to any agenda for the sake of scoring political points, 8 years of someone named Bush and his relentless obfuscations and scandals, stoking the flames of right-wing hatemongers, continuous racism and homophobia, and so on aren't a reason to "hate on Republican[t]s", I'm not quite sure what is.


Well, probably the real reason you hate Republicans would be the reason, a political ideology that differs from your own.
#31 Nov 18 2009 at 1:08 PM Rating: Excellent
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
I've read Mein Kampf so don't see the point of plowing through this re-write.
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#32REDACTED, Posted: Nov 18 2009 at 1:13 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Cat,
#33 Nov 18 2009 at 1:14 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
I think the major point here is that it's not dems who aren't getting scrutinized and GOP's who are. It's only palin who's getting this treatment, other GOP writers have no more hassle then dem writers. It's a false attempt to politicize. Of course the right wingers on this forum will never miss an opportunity to twist something into a major political issue.

Quote:
She criticizes President Barack Obama for pushing through a bailout package that actually was achieved by his Republican predecessor George W. Bush -- a package she seemed to support at the time.
Smiley: laugh

Edited, Nov 18th 2009 1:18pm by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#34REDACTED, Posted: Nov 18 2009 at 1:18 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Nobby,
#35 Nov 18 2009 at 1:23 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
publiusvarus wrote:
But they couldn't be bothered with fact checking Obama's book or associations prior to his election.

Or McCain's. OMG LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS!!!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#36 Nov 18 2009 at 1:30 PM Rating: Excellent
****
5,684 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
Cat,

Quote:
The AP employs 4,300 reporters worldwide. I'm sure they could spare 11 for the week it took them to do this, especially since the elections are over.


But they couldn't be bothered with fact checking Obama's book or associations prior to his election.



are you talking about the "dreams of my father" book? Isn't that some unpolitical life story of his? It's kind of pointless to fact check that kind of stuff.
#37 Nov 18 2009 at 1:32 PM Rating: Good
Bardalicious wrote:
publiusvarus wrote:
Cat,

Quote:
The AP employs 4,300 reporters worldwide. I'm sure they could spare 11 for the week it took them to do this, especially since the elections are over.


But they couldn't be bothered with fact checking Obama's book or associations prior to his election.



are you talking about the "dreams of my father" book? Isn't that some unpolitical life story of his? It's kind of pointless to fact check that kind of stuff.


I assume he's talking about The Audacity of Hope.
#38 Nov 18 2009 at 1:33 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts

Slate made a humorous index for the book:
http://www.slate.com/id/2235917/

#39 Nov 18 2009 at 1:39 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
Cat,

Quote:
The AP employs 4,300 reporters worldwide. I'm sure they could spare 11 for the week it took them to do this, especially since the elections are over.


But they couldn't be bothered with fact checking Obama's book or associations prior to his election.



Isn't that what we have Orly Taitz for?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#40 Nov 18 2009 at 1:42 PM Rating: Good
Thanks for that link. From an offshoot page we get the golden quote:

Quote:
“If you’re writing a substantial book, and I don’t know if Ms. Palin’s book qualifies, I think there’s a moral obligation to write an index,” said Christopher Buckley, a life-long observer of D.C. etiquette (and now a columnist for The Daily Beast).
#41REDACTED, Posted: Nov 18 2009 at 1:44 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Xarus,
#42 Nov 18 2009 at 1:48 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
12,049 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
That this woman is extremely popular with a major democrat voting block (women). That this woman is actually atractive and well spoken.



... you think that she's popular with Democratic women? Because otherwise you're just not making much sense. Oh, REPUBLICAN women like her? That's, uh, not usually a major democrat (sic) voting bloc(k) (sic).

She is attractive. She is not well spoken.

Maverick.
#43REDACTED, Posted: Nov 18 2009 at 1:56 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Locked,
#44 Nov 18 2009 at 2:05 PM Rating: Good
*****
12,049 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
Locked,

Quote:
... you think that she's popular with Democratic women?


With independents she sure is. And yes this is a major voting block for Dems.


I'd like to see some proof of this.
Quote:
In polling conducted Wednesday and Thursday evenings, after the disclosure that the Republican National Committee used political funds to help Palin assemble a wardrobe for the campaign, 51 percent said they have a negative impression of her. Fewer, 46 percent, said they have a favorable view. That marks a stark turnaround from early September, when 59 percent of likely voters held positive opinions.

The declines in Palin's ratings have been even more substantial among the very voters Republicans aimed to woo. The percentage of white women viewing her favorably dropped 21 points since early September; among independent women, it fell 24 points.


That's from back in 2008.
Quote:
The former Alaska governor’s popularity score is a negative 9, with 43% liking her and 52% seeing her unfavorably.

"Favorability is the most basic measure of a public figure's popularity; in politics, where majorities win, it’s trouble when it goes negative, as it's been for Palin since October 2008," notes ABC's poll maven, Gary Langer.

There's more bad news for Palin: A solid 60% say she's not qualified to be President, and 53% say they definitely would not vote for her in 2012.


More recent (ie, a couple days ago). Doesn't mention women, but it does mention her falling popularity. Everything I've heard is that she remains popular among Republicans, unpopular among Democrats, and has continuously falling popularity among independents.
#45REDACTED, Posted: Nov 18 2009 at 2:08 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Locked,
#46 Nov 18 2009 at 2:08 PM Rating: Excellent
I hope Independent women have more intelligence than that.

No, a lot of women dislike Palin because they realize she's a brainless bimbo, all ambition and no smarts.

Caribou Barbie, indeed. *snort*
#47 Nov 18 2009 at 2:09 PM Rating: Good
*****
12,049 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
Locked,

Quote:
Everything I've heard is that she remains popular among Republicans, unpopular among Democrats, and has continuously falling popularity among independents.


And reality tells us the media and liberals are trying to destroy her because of her popularity among independents.


What reality? Again, back it up.
#48 Nov 18 2009 at 2:14 PM Rating: Good
53% of people surveyed recently said they "definitely would NOT vote" for Palin if she ever ran for president.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2009/11/sarah_palin_new_chapter_same_c.html

Quote:
Women tend to be more critical of Palin than are men, with female Democrats and independents more apt than their male counterparts to view her unfavorably, see her as not qualified for the presidency and say they would not support her candidacy.


Try again, Virus.
#49 Nov 18 2009 at 2:23 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Sir Kavekk wrote:
I assume he's talking about The Audacity of Hope.

Having read the book, there's not a lot there to fact check. It's mainly opinions and political rhetoric.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#50REDACTED, Posted: Nov 18 2009 at 2:32 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Cat,
#51 Nov 18 2009 at 2:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
publiusvarus wrote:
And Obama's disapproval is nearly 50%. As the economy get's worse so will his support as will Palins support increase.

Why do you think Palin will pick up the support and not Romney or Huckabee or one of the other GOP probably candidates in 2012? Palin's problems aren't that people like Obama too darn much.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 227 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (227)