New poll's out: McCain is tanking, and independents are much less impressed with Palin today than they were when she debuted. In a combox thread below, Rawlins Gilliland, the Oscar Wilde of Dallas, has the best explanation yet for the waning popularity of Sarah Palin:
"As we learned at that Super Bowl: You cannot have Kathi Lee Gifford sing the Star Spangled Banner and expect the stadium crowd to stay on its feet."
McCain as Reeg?
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
From a personal point of view, my first reaction to Palin was that I could not stand the sound of her voice, literally, and hit the mute button.
Obviously the economy is the iceberg that the McCain ship hit and it would probably take some pretty dramatic foreign event to plug the leak, at least as things look right now, but we must never underestimate the power of Biden to screw things up. After all, two weeks ago Obama was meat on a stick largely because of him.
I think, and this is just a guess, that what is really doing in Palin is not the MSM coverage, which is so obviously slanted as to be discounted by the bulk of the voters, nor hatchet jobs emanating from the NYT or the Washington Post, as no one outside of news rooms even reads those papers nor cares what they say. (Though I think the Oliphant cartoon really captured the image that Palin's religion has in mainstream America.)
It is the cover of the National Enquirer emblazoned with Palin's face and tales of scandal that is hurting her. Why? Everyone in the country who buys groceries sees that cover in the check-out line. And right now the National Enquirer has more credibility with the public than all other news media combined.
To follow up on what Charles said, I would ask Rod why the Enquirer investigation of Palin is any different from the investigation of Edwards? I mean, I believe that in principle it is completely irrelevant who she may or may not have slept with. Hell, if she (or for that matter, McCain, Edwards, Obama, or Biden) was having an affair right now, it's really no one's business as long it doesn't affect her governance or policies (in the Renaissance, they used to say the best lovers of kings were those who kept the king happy while leaving his scepter alone). The morality is a separate issue, but not directly relevant to voting for or against.
My point is this: Rod spent a lot of thread-time arguing in favor of the Silky Pony probe, as he put it, even though Edwards was no longer running for public office at that time. Maybe I've missed something, but it seems that all I'm hearing from him about the coverage of Palin (who, I might point out, is actively running) is crickets. I'm not asking for opinions as to whether the story is true or not, at this point; just this: Is the Enquirer justified in pursuing this? And if Rod's answer is "no", I'd sure like to hear the reasoning!
What is the Enquirer pursuing? If they're going after her kids, no. If they're going after her, I don't see where I have any room to complain. I simply haven't paid attention.
The Enquirer ran a story a few weeks ago about Sarah Palin possibly having an affair with a business partner of her husband's. The Enquirer defended the story and says that they will put out more in the future. I haven't heard anything else about it.
Huh? Which ONE candidate on either ticket has executive government experience?
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.