About Me

Name: Tom L.
Location: Valdese, NC
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 
[Click to edit me]

Palin Obsession

 
 

What is with the liberal media’s obsession with Sarah Palin?

If you disregard articles on oil and gas, there was all but no national coverage of Mrs. Palin before July 2008.

The governor wrote an op-ed piece in The (liberal) New York Times on January 5, 2008 (on polar bears).

The Times of London on February 11, 2008 wrote: “Seeking to offset a Clinton-Obama duo with either an obscure female such as Sarah Palin (Governor of Alaska)…” Note at that point it was a Clinton-Obama ticket.

A few weeks later Mrs. Palin really got coverage: The Washington Post, February 27, 2008:

Mayor Michael Bloomberg is emerging as consensus pick for vice president among both Republicans and Democrats.

Well, not exactly, but, based on a perusal of the nearly 600 entries in our contest to pick a running mate for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and the 2,600 entries to select one for Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), a fair number of Loop Fans speculated that either candidate might pick Bloomberg as his No. 2…

…One entrant, from Cairo, picked 44-year-old Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R).

On May 26, 2008 Nat Hentoff in The Washington Times wrote a substantial piece putting forth Sarah Palin as the Republican vice-presidential nominee.

But, Newsweek, on June 16, 2008, wrote: “…conservatives talk up Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, but she is all but unknown to McCain.”

One would guess that on June 30, 2008, outside of Alaska, almost zero percent of Americans would remember ever hearing of Sara Palin.

So, for discussions sake, say Sarah Palin “burst” onto the national scene on July 1, 2008. By election night in November her 15 minutes of fame should have ended.

That is just over four months in the spotlight.

Today, eight months after the election the liberal media cannot let go of Sarah Palin.

There is almost no rational explanation for their obsession.

Perhaps the best explanation is they are trying to make her the poster “girl” for Republicans and by vilifying her they hope their ongoing negative attacks on her will rub off on the entire Republican Party.

What other explanation is there?
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »