UPDATE: More on the Gore-Palin double standard
July 28, 2009 12:12 pm ET by Jamison Foser
To follow up on Eric's follow-up to my point about the media's response to Sarah Palin's media criticism: the media's ridicule of Al Gore's 2002 media criticism, and their acquiescence to Palin's, is all the more striking given the media's treatment of Gore from 1997 through 2000 (not that it ended then.)
The media really did "make things up" about Gore -- they made up the claim that Gore had taken credit for discovering Love Canal, they made up a never-ending series of Gore exaggerations that all -- every one of them -- were actual media exaggerations; they made up fantasies about why he wore brown clothes (actual reason: everybody wears brown) and three-button suits (actual reason: everybody in 1999 wore three-button suits.) They made up lies Gore didn't tell, then used those made-up lies to call Gore a liar. They dutifully passed on every RNC attack on Gore, no matter how stupid and false, as fact.
And when Gore called them on it, they ridiculed him.
But when Sarah Palin -- who the media never held as accountable for her actual lies as they held Gore for the lies he didn't tell -- accuses the media of making things up, they can't be bothered to demand an example, and they certainly don't point out that Palin herself raised making things up to an art form during her campaign last year.
Is it any wonder the myth of the liberal media persists, given the way reporters dismiss valid progressive media criticism and obligingly pass along every inane conservative attack on their work?
F.D.R, A two front World War, polio, high blood pressure & Heart desease and that's just the start.
J.F.K, The Cuban Missile Crisis, addisons desease & A broken Freaking Back, taking every pain killer of the day.
Sarah Palin " You know the main stream media they just keep picking away"
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
We do need to keep after them about how they treat the far rightwing fringe as 'mainstream' while treating all democrats as far left fringies.
You seem like a blogger looking for an issue. When you presented this issue, at first it was about Palin attacking the media and using the military as cover. After it was pointed out that was not the case, given the fact you didn't use the whole quote or in context, then Eric jumped in to change the focus.
Eric B. then described Governor Palin's 'alleged' rant against the media with what happened to algore in a previous life. It was shown that in a 23 minute speech, she spent all of 45 seconds or so about the media in the comment media matters (for very little) highlighted. It is obvious when viewed that the comment about the troops was neither a smokescreen or the focus of her referencing the media. She both compliments the media,the important role it plays in our democracy, and then makes it clear, the 'don't make things up' statement is not for all in the media.
Jamison, view the video, part 1 beginning around 3 minute mark to see the breadth and width of the alleged rant.
Now this has become about the lies that Gore and Palin have stated and the media response. When this line is debunked, I'm sure mm(fvl) will move on to some other complaint about her. Be honest, this is not about how or what she said, this line of blogging is about the fear the left as in her as a potential candidate. Isn't this just an example of "the politics of personal destruction"?
You should probably re-read my original post. It was about the media uncritically quoting Palin's comment about the media making things up, without noting Palin's own history of making things up.
Eric's follow-up, and this post, flow naturally from that.
There was no missing necessary context from my original point. Nothing she said negated the fact that she accused the media of making things up.
This from the first blog in the discussion:
Again, the full context of her statement gives your quote a different flavor. This was not someone waving the flag or hiding behind the death of soldiers to make the point, it was at the end of several statments reminding the media of the important part of democracy that they possess.
The citation in you post (never use your own stuff as referencing proof, either) you link to comments about her lying about the bridge to nowhere. I could not find the full story in your link to a previous mm(fvl) report. But even within the confines of your commentary, it states that at best she was 'wishy-washy' in her support of the bridge while campaigning for, not acting as,governor. In the article, it admits that she basically said it was a lost cause and the project abandoned.
Her speech wasn't a rant against the media and their lack of indignation in response probably reflects that they understood both the content and purpose of her statement and that there was nothing sanctimonious about it.
Are you kidding? Do you have an issue with the article he referenced? If not, why can't he reference it? Are you saying Einstein was wrong to reference his General Theory of Relativity in his later research?
LMFAO. Well, duh. That's what bloggers do.
I'm glad to have provided an opportunity for you to nail me, which you did!
In the words of our president, I acted stupidly! :)
sarah palin has the courage to just let the truth roll out whether she thinks you'll like it or not. i'll follow palin wherever she decides to take her career. i wouldn't trust anything the above 3 said about anything. i'm not sure either of them could order breakfast without lying.
dennisintn