"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 13:50:01 -0400, with neither quill nor qualm, "Ed
Huntress" quickly quoth:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
scientists that says the bears are in bad shape, so she could sue the
federal government to keep them off the endangered list. They get in the
way
of drilling for oil, you see...
Warning: You won't like this article. g
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us...4palin.html?hp
No, I don't. Not only because it's a political hit piece (judging by
the tone and content, I'd give 1,000,000:1 odds that the writers are
staunch Democrats), but because it brings to light more of the down
side of Sarah Palin.
Well, what the hell? Would you send a bunch of Republicans to do an
investigative story about Palin? C'mon, Larry, think about incentives
here.
They're the key to everything, including uncovering the muck that McCain's
campaign operatives would rather cover up. Whoever you send on that job,
you
don't want it to be someone who would finish the day in the hotel bar,
yukking it up with McCain's campaign handlers.
Whatever happened to a neutral press? sigh
When did such a thing ever exist? The great days of American journalism were
the days of the partisan press, where every city had three or four
newspapers, all representing a different interest group.
We had a short spell during which the new "professionalism" of the press
(which started in the mid-'50s) was associated with neutral objectivity. But
that was a thin layer on top that didn't last. By design or accident,
though, today's press is vastly less partisan than anything we had in the US
before the mid-'50s.
A quick writer background check:
Goodman - graduate of Berkeley, decadal worker @ Washington Post.
Powell - seems to run the political blog and appears to write articles
only about Obama. (I didn't read it.)
Becker - seems to be the token conservative in this trio.
Warning: You won't like this article. g
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/us...11chicago.html
Jeez, I read that months ago. Would you call that a political hit piece?
g
Nah, but it's the best I could do on short notice. 
They vetted Obama slowly over the course of a year. With Palin, they have
a
few weeks. Expect them to focus on the part that's missing, the part that
the McCain campaign hasn't served up on a platter of press releases: the
things that question and examine what Peggy Noonan called "the narrative."
Yeah, I'm unhappy that the honeymoon with Sarah was so short. Lots of
people are already getting the 7 year itch.
She had a good run. Most people only get 15 minutes. g
She will continue to be a lightning rod for the rest of the campaign. The
free ride is over, but she could still be the influence that flips the
election. A lot of people have invested their hopes and desires in her, like
tossing coins into a wishing well. Or maybe a piņata will turn out to be a
better analogy.
That's what the press is supposed to do. That's why Thomas Jefferson, who
was brutalized by a truly vicious and partisan press, beyond anything that
could be published today except on the Web, said that, given the choice of
government without newspapers or newspapers without government, he'd take
the latter.
Interesting.
I got a bad whiff of Palin almost from the start. I don't claim special
insight but I'll tell you what that whiff smelled like to me, and from
whom
I've smelled it befo Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and,
in spades, Newt Gingrich and Tom DeLay. It's the smell of ambition run
amok,
I got that from Bill and Hillary, and I sensed the same thing from
Barack. Now I'm getting it from Sarah. Ayup, politics stink.
With Bill Clinton, I saw him on TV with the audio muted and
immediately distrusted him. Nothing I saw after that relieved it a
bit. I heard Obama and got the same feeling of distrust.
the kind that's so overpowering to the individual who has it that the
underlying focus is entirely on that person's success, in which the
ostensible object -- the well-being of the American people, for example --
becomes a surrogate and a symbol for the real object they want to
aggrandize, which is themselves. To such people, all things are justified
if
they contribute to achieving self-justification and personal glory. As
Maureen Dowd put it today, Palin is a Napolean in bunny boots. Palin might
describe herself as being on a mission from God.
Yeah, the religious aspect has me gagging already, too.
Regarding your concern for the animals: Ed, why don't you move to
Alaska so you can save the polar bears? (and your seals/sea lions) g
The polar bears can take care of themselves, thank you. All they need is a
little good press from time to time. If they're pushed back because of
Arctic melting, they'll survive in smaller numbers. There's little that
will
change that in the short run, anyway. But if they're pushed *out*, they
could have a much harder time.
Arctic melting would push them in and I don't think anyone will get in
their way. No worries, except for deceitful filmmakers faking bears
swimming for their lives. Effin' Gore...
Out of curiosity, do you have any good leads on that story? I heard it, but
I was too busy at the time to investigate it. Don't bother looking for it. I
can Google it, I just wondered if you have any particular information.
--
Ed Huntress