Video: John Ziegler and David Shuster yell at each other over Palin

posted at 2:45 pm on January 9, 2009 by Allahpundit

A screaming match for your Friday afternoon entertainment. Shuster’s numbers are off, but not by much: It was 59 percent who thought she was unqualified to be VP, not 65.

Ace is right about the Palin interview, incidentally. Grievance is an unappealing quality in a politician, especially one whose media opportunities would be better spent showing off her policy chops ahead of 2012. She has endless surrogates willing to complain about the coverage on her behalf; doing it herself plays well with the base but at the price of diminishing her. Ironically, she herself once warned Hillary not to be perceived as a whiner. Funny what a campaign can do.

Which is not to suggest that she’s blowing smoke. Via Gateway Pundit, here’s the latest from the Anchorage Daily News. They’re still pursuing the “Trig is really Bristol’s son” smear.



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Ace has it from a different source. It’s still working.

meltenn on January 9, 2009 at 8:25 PM

Followed your link. The YouTube embed is MIA. Did NBC scrub this story already?

L.N. Smithee on January 9, 2009 at 8:51 PM

L.N. Smithee on January 9, 2009 at 8:51 PM

It’s still working for me. I just tried the embed at the top of this page and it’s working for me too. I don’t know what’s up. Anybody else having trouble?

meltenn on January 9, 2009 at 8:55 PM

therightwinger on January 9, 2009 at 8:07 PM

That’s not true. She appeals to me and I am by no means a social conservative. I’ll admit that I was initially wary of her, knowing her personal views on things like abortion (as just one example), but in one of her interviews, when she was asked about it, she essentially said that being pro-life is her PERSONAL belief and she isn’t about imposing her personal beliefs on everyone else. That struck a chord with my libertarian self. I later learned that when the truth about the library book scandal came out, it was essentially the same thing: She didn’t personally feel the book belonged in the library, but she never asked for it to be removed.

I’m OK with social conservatives, provided they are also proven fiscal conservatives. Like Reagan. I think Palin’s record shows she fits the bill as well.

As for Huckabee, I can’t speak for anyone else, but for me the reason he’s divisive is because he’s not a conservative. Arkansas was one of the most highly taxed states in the nation when he left office, and yet we’re also one of the poorest. Fiscal conservative Huckabee is not. At least with Palin, what you see is what you get.

NoLeftTurn on January 9, 2009 at 8:59 PM

Jim62sch on January 9, 2009 at 7:30 PM

There’s a Troofer attacking you over at MC. That lady posts at Truther Central too. I’ve seen her pic/handle in the comments over there. MC’s gonna have to close off the comments if the rest of them get wind.

meltenn on January 9, 2009 at 9:00 PM

The GOP has to find a candidate has wide appeal. Palin only appeals to social conservatives. So unless you want to win the deep south, and a few other states get behind someone who can win and election and expand the map.

Bobby Jindal and Mark Sanford would be a good start.

therightwinger on January 9, 2009 at 8:07 PM

That’s an odd comment considering Jindal and Sanford are pro-life and governors of Southern states (LA and SC).

INC on January 9, 2009 at 9:02 PM

Someone as smart as you claim Palin to be would not give an interview like the ones she gave to Couric and Jennings.

This is the left’s entire case against Sarah Palin; she gave two weak interviews. That’s awfully thin gruel for a claim of incompetence, especially for a candidate with Ms. Palin’s credentials.

It isn’t only thin gruel, it isn’t very accurate. The Gibson interview was edited to look like a disaster. Anyone who took the time to watch the unedited complete interviews, that ABC of course never aired, knows that.

Yet another example of media malfeasance.

ProfessorMiao on January 9, 2009 at 9:12 PM

The Gibson interview was edited to look like a disaster.

Yes, and the Couric interview was marketed to look bad. They took a couple of clips where Palin looked bad and used those as ‘teasers’ to advertise the interview. Most people saw those clips several times and heard the media repeating Obama’s talking points about them before they ever saw the the interview (if they ever did see it).

Sarah was right – the McCain camp should have backed out of the second and third interviews and blasted CBS after seeing the biased way the first one was handled.

kcewa on January 9, 2009 at 9:20 PM

Fiscally responsible and strong national defense are my two biggest criteria in a candidate. Governor Palin has both.

Hog Wild on January 9, 2009 at 9:34 PM

NoLeftTurn on January 9, 2009 at 8:59 PM

I agree with your take on why Huck is divisive.

Jonah Goldberg had an interesting column right after the election about the relationship between social conservatives and fiscal conservatives.

GOP Road Sign: Keep Right

…in Congress and in state legislatures, the more pro-life you are, the more likely you are to be a free-market, low-tax conservative. The more pro-choice you are, the more likely it is that you will be remarkably generous with other people’s money.

…It turns out that people who buy into the logic of social liberalism, not just on abortion but racial and other issues as well, usually find themselves ill-equipped ideologically to say no to additional spending on causes they care about. They even find it difficult to stay Republicans, as we can see from recent example Colin Powell, who endorsed Barack Obama for president for largely ethereal reasons.

It should be noted that it’s also difficult to be fiscally conservative and socially conservative if you’ve jettisoned the conservative dogma of limited government

INC on January 9, 2009 at 9:34 PM

Hate to be too repetitive, but Palin has no chance of winning the GOP nomination. She’s too polarizing. Essentially, she’s Huckabee with a uterus.

therightwinger on January 9, 2009 at 7:59 PM

I hate to be repetitive also, but Reagan was probably the most polarizing political figure of my lifetime so far. As for “divisive”, the whole motivation the frantic anti-Palin slime job is the knowledge that when people get to know her — know her, and not the MSM/pop culture slime caricature which they are desperate to become THE Sarah Palin — they like her. Thus the big crowds, thus the big boost in the polls that McCain enjoyed prior to the farcical and oh-so-timely “economic meltdown”.

ddrintn on January 9, 2009 at 10:02 PM

The second and of these jackass MSM hacks take any responsibility for the havoc they wreak, I’ll consider not laughing when they demand someone else do so.

Merovign on January 9, 2009 at 10:23 PM

So if I’m understanding this correctly, the media rag can AND DID rag all over Palin AND her family but she’s not supposed to talk about how the biased media ragged on her and her family because it’s “unappealing”???

Riiiiight. I forgot that when we are looking for potential 2012 presidential candidates we should look for someone who portrays themself as appealing to…the media.

Deeanne on January 9, 2009 at 10:33 PM

Riiiiight. I forgot that when we are looking for potential 2012 presidential candidates we should look for someone who portrays themself as appealing to…the media.

Deeanne on January 9, 2009 at 10:33 PM

yeah, tthat didn’t work out to well in 2008, did it?

Red State State of Mind on January 9, 2009 at 10:48 PM

I prefer her comments to let us know she is a real person, not some political (fake) person.

Maybe this is what we, the voters should be looking for…

ChuckTX on January 9, 2009 at 11:56 PM

ddrintn on January 9, 2009 at 10:02 PM

You right — when people get to know the real Sarah Palin, they like her.

A Savannah TV station’s account of the rally Palin held for Saxby Chambliss included a comment from an Obama supporter who went to hear her speak:

Barack Obama supporter Gregory Broome was surprised by the governor’s speech.

“I think she is a wonderful speaker – it was invigorating to watch her speak, to see what she had to say, she talked about some core issues and I agreed with her, that was nice,” said Broome.

See, Sarah can improve her image beyond the base.

ramrocks on January 10, 2009 at 12:05 AM

Two things:

Schuster’s schnoz annoys me.

He’s a lying piece of gray matter. POS media drone!

blatantblue on January 10, 2009 at 12:12 AM

I cannot believe CNN is buying this ridiculous explanation.

mikeyboss on January 10, 2009 at 12:01 AM

They aren’t “buying” into this they are complicit in this fraud… They pulled it to clean it up a bit for their Leftist followers. CNN could care less what conservatives think…when was the last time you all went to CNN to watch anything? They know they don’t have us in their audience. Cleaning it up was for the purpose of not blowing it with their peeps and forcing them to acknowledge what they are… Liars and haters…

CCRWM on January 10, 2009 at 12:23 AM

“Unreal… CRAZED Media STILL Investigating If Palin Is Trig’s Mom!”

“In fact, one thing that I have noticed……..is that all of these conspiracy theories depend on the perpetrators being endlessly clever.

I think you’ll find the facts also work if you assume everyone is endlessly stupid”

Author unknown

DSchoen on January 10, 2009 at 12:29 AM

She has endless surrogates willing to complain about the coverage on her behalf; doing it herself plays well with the base but at the price of diminishing her

Endless surrogates? Like you? If you keep this shtick, it will really dimish your beloved Romney.

promachus on January 10, 2009 at 12:37 AM

Biased is as biased does and David Shuster is damn well biased and he has no problem with putting out on national TV.

Speakup on January 10, 2009 at 12:46 AM

Shuster is such a butt clown. He is the poster boy for liberal main steam media. The big question is why does MSNBC want someone on the air whose mouth makes him look like some sort of deminted puppet? Couldn’t they find someone who makes them look like a bigger joke than they are?

Star20 on January 10, 2009 at 12:46 AM

If the GOP were to run with Sarah Palin in 2012 they would not win any more states than McCain and Dole won, and they’d probably lose a few.

The idea is to get more people to vote for you. Not less.

therightwinger on January 10, 2009 at 12:50 AM

we need Nelson Rockefeller to run in 2012

to bring in those moderates and independents!!!

joey24007 on January 10, 2009 at 12:57 AM

we need Nelson Rockefeller to run in 2012

to bring in those moderates and independent

Nah. Someone who you know, like knows stuff will do.

therightwinger on January 10, 2009 at 1:07 AM

McCain – Crist!!!

Moderates for America

“we don’t really believe in anything”

joey24007 on January 10, 2009 at 1:13 AM

You know, you can’t win elections just with the crowd who thinks Barack Obama is a closet muslim.

therightwinger on January 10, 2009 at 1:13 AM

You know, you can’t win elections just with the crowd who thinks Barack Obama is a closet muslim.

therightwinger on January 10, 2009 at 1:13 AM

Well, I like Sarah Palin and don’t think Obama is a closet Muslim. But then again, Obama won with the crowd who thinks Sarah is Trig’s grandmother, or that she banned books, or that she consults witch doctors, so…

ddrintn on January 10, 2009 at 1:21 AM

Allahpundit,

You really don’t like her and are rationalising your feelings. Plain and simple. Case in point, she mentioned that Obama wanted family off limits and it was done, butin her case it wasn’t,even more pathetic that the Trig issue continues. (Even though I think she shoud ignore those people, and like the Obama birth certificate crowd they will go away)

I have a positive impression of her and see her as being on the offensive. It’s actually very smart and very ok, here’s why. Blogosphere will have more power in the next election cycle. The old media that supported Ob is on the way out, thier spinning for him was obvious and will be even more so (Travis Smiley) (especially if he fails economically)…then they will go down with him.

Palin will say…see I told you so.

She will get to the issues eventually, but right now she has a valid point, and her profile on this media bias issue will only highlight it more. Hopefully for those low info voters

cayman on January 10, 2009 at 2:38 AM

Sarah’s supporters are beginning to fully understand how the MSM misrepresented her character and her political positions and held her up to relentless ridicule and vilification during the campaign. With Zielgler’s documentary which he says will be released at the end of February we will even get a clearer picture. From that point I strongly believe that the conservative movement will be able to form a united front against the MSM; if Sarah leads the movement fantastic-if some other conservative is proven more worthy that’s fine as well. But never again are we going to allow the MSM to dictate who we put forward for POTUS. That is my prediction for 2012 and beyond.

technopeasant on January 10, 2009 at 2:55 AM

John McCain ran essentially the same losing campaign used in 2000. He had two, maybe three bumps. Sara Cuda, St. Paul speech and I forget the other. Then he blew it. He is responsible.

John Zigler is doing yeoman work with Sara. Don’t over think it. Liked him in LA and glad to see him landing on his feet. Docs is one of his strengths.

Our order of business is to get a conservative in as RNC chairman. Ken Blackwell fits that bill; maybe Michael Savage as Vice or somewhere close. There are four years to work. The plan is simple as Regan made the pattern. Real conservatives win. Palin is real.

“Now go do the right thing.”

Flying 50 Stars and Stripes

Caststeel on January 10, 2009 at 3:24 AM

Ace is right about the Palin interview, incidentally. Grievance is an unappealing quality in a politician, especially one whose media opportunities would be better spent showing off her policy chops ahead of 2012.

You are both wrong AP, while she shouldn’t whine (and I don’t call this whining) our next candidate should attack the MSM for their bias. This situation has reached critical mass during the last election cycle and the public recognizes it. Making an issue out of that is a good way to make inroads. Don’t get me wrong, that alone will not do it, there must be serious policy that appeals to the bulk of Americans. But we have to declare war on the MSM and shame the 4th estate back into being a servant of the people. The time is right for this fight. And we must fight all our enemies, not just the dems but their enablers as well.

conservnut on January 10, 2009 at 9:00 AM

here’s the latest from the Anchorage Daily News. They’re still pursuing the “Trig is really Bristol’s son” smear.

If one of these “outlets” could be made to feel the consequences of their irresponsible actions the rest would take heed. I am saying set an example with one of these so called news outlets. I don’t think it is bad press defending yourself or your family. Only the cynics think there is not a time and place to fight back. It would be a tricky thing because of Free Speech but many many Americans would like to see the SMEAR MERCHANTS take one in the chops.
Accomplishing that doesn’t make a person a whiner, that makes them a WINNER. Does anyone remember what they did to Richard Jewel at the Olympics re the bombing in Atlanta…Palin needs to make an example of ONE of the SMEAR MERCHANTS make them feel some pain…preferably in their wallets- next to their brains:)

Dr Evil on January 10, 2009 at 9:37 AM

I personally think that the MSM hated Gov. Palin so much is because she is REAL and they are scared to death of her! They had made up their minds that we needed THE MESSIAH to be our next President, and so we have him! They could not let their dreams get derailed by a person, a woman who is running a family (with all its little and big problems and joys) AND a state, who is well liked by her constituents (I live in Illinois, need I say more?), and who says what she means and means what she says! She is truly a strong woman, and the libs cannot tolerate that as much as they sing kumba-jah around the campfire of womens’ lib! I hope and pray she will NOT throw in the towel after all the problems she and her family have gone through – and are still enduring! I always thought she was like a breath of fresh air – someone sorely needed in government!

mkosin on January 10, 2009 at 9:54 AM

You know, you can’t win elections just with the crowd who thinks Barack Obama is a closet muslim.

therightwinger on January 10, 2009 at 1:13 AM

Alright, now I think “therightwinger” is a leftist plant. They’re the only ones I know who are still going on about “the crowd who thinks Obama is a closet Muslim,” or who try to put Palin into that category.

philwynk on January 10, 2009 at 9:54 AM

Republicans/Conservatives have NO CHOICE but to attack the media

joey24007 on January 10, 2009 at 10:13 AM

People who are still spewing the “Trig isn’t Palin’s baby” nonsense are certifiably disturbed. Any continuation of that stupidity is a waste of time – to demand a BC of a baby who ISN’T RUNNING FOR PUBLIC OFFICE far exceeds the issue of BO situation.

For those who dismiss Palin as divisive – who exactly do you think would a) unite Republicans and b) appeal to Independents?

katiejane on January 10, 2009 at 10:37 AM

This thing with Palin and the media reminded me of an old Charles Bronson Movie… Mr. Majystic. Bronson is a watermelon grower. He gets on the bad side of the mob.

My favorite scene is when Bronson is in a diner and the mob guy is meeting with him. The mob guy says to Bronson that he’s going to kill him. After a minute Charlie says “No sense trying to get on your good side then” and sucker punches the guy.

Youtube bronson clip

Anyway, Sarah Palin could bring peace to the middle east, cure cancer, cure dandruff, bring prosperity to the world, and the liberal left and their media morons would still hate her. I’m beginning to think that the right tact is to bring it on.

I was glad to see that she blew off that fat bloated whale oparah (obama’s second wife) when Oprah wanted to interview he AFTER the election. Remember Oprah wouldn’t have Palin on BEFORE the election.

bullseye on January 10, 2009 at 11:08 AM

Compared to tire pressure boy she’s a genius.

dogsoldier on January 10, 2009 at 11:11 AM

You know, you can’t win elections just with the crowd who thinks Barack Obama is a closet muslim.

therightwinger on January 10, 2009 at 1:13 AM

Alright, now I think “therightwinger” is a leftist plant. They’re the only ones I know who are still going on about “the crowd who thinks Obama is a closet Muslim,” or who try to put Palin into that category.

philwynk on January 10, 2009 at 9:54 AM

Right, the folks in Gaza are probably the last to think he is a Muslim, and they are apparently beginning to have doubts. This guy rightwinger is most likely a BO stooge, given that he says you can’t win with a socon and proposes Sanford instead: Sanford being just as much a socon as Palin. Personally, I think there are several possible candidates I could support, but I like Palin and, unlike many others, I think she has “it”. Whether she runs for POTUS or not, I admire Palin and wish her the best.

littleguy on January 10, 2009 at 11:30 AM

So if I’m understanding this correctly, the media rag can AND DID rag all over Palin AND her family but she’s not supposed to talk about how the biased media ragged on her and her family because it’s “unappealing”???

Riiiiight. I forgot that when we are looking for potential 2012 presidential candidates we should look for someone who portrays themself as appealing to…the media.

Deeanne on January 9, 2009 at 10:33 PM

X2!

I’m still amazed when I hear an intelligent person tell me things about Palin or Obama. The latest was this person didn’t know Obama supported the FOCA and had said that would be the first thing he would sign in office. Unfortunately the email that informed them of this was over the top in it’s hysteria and thereby distracted from good arguments against FOCA but that a prochoice person could have problems with FOCA and STILL not have known Obama supported it – grrrrrr

aikidoka on January 10, 2009 at 12:10 PM

When you have a person like Gov. Palin that both the Dems & the Rep.Rinos fear.I say she the one we need to take back our party from the Mod/Libs/Rinos Rep. People like her and Gov Jindal Gov Sanford and Sen.Dement are the future.

thmcbb on January 10, 2009 at 12:33 PM

Who gives a crap what Ace says, that blog hardly makes sense anymore.

gator70 on January 10, 2009 at 12:49 PM

I’m still amazed when I hear an intelligent person tell me things about Palin or Obama. The latest was this person didn’t know Obama supported the FOCA and had said that would be the first thing he would sign in office.

aikidoka on January 10, 2009 at 12:10 PM

No cause for amazement here. The people to whom you refer are simply ignorant Obama voters who know only what the MSM wanted them to know.

ddrintn on January 10, 2009 at 12:51 PM

thmcbb on January 10, 2009 at 12:33 PM

Yes I agree … if anything Palin has shown that the Republican party needed to get back to the basics

add to that list Huntsman Jr. of Utah

joey24007 on January 10, 2009 at 1:00 PM

Did The One only have all-star interviews? I am sure the MSM thought so. When he gave them. The whole premise is stupid and opinions are based on whatever notions existed in the first place. Interviews won’t help or hurt in the long run, what she does as governor will. And when she can reach outside of the state in an official capacity, that will be the mark of a leader.

Cindy Munford on January 10, 2009 at 1:09 PM

Sarah was/is my gal in 08, 12, 16, 20, 24 and the rest of her life. I am almost 76 so if my demise happens before her career ends I will be up there (hopefully, up there)rooting her on! She’s what’s right with America and Shuster is one of our errors.

Herb on January 10, 2009 at 1:13 PM

Did The One only have all-star interviews? I am sure the MSM thought so. When he gave them.

Cindy Munford on January 10, 2009

Sure, but when the hard-hitting questions are of the “How does it feel to be so wonderfully wonderful? How do you handle the burden of being so great?” type, even I could shine in such interviews. I don’t recall, for example, any of the MSM sycophants asking or even suggesting if Obama might be afflicted with hubris.

Sarah was/is my gal in 08, 12, 16, 20, 24 and the rest of her life. I am almost 76 so if my demise happens before her career ends I will be up there (hopefully, up there)rooting her on! She’s what’s right with America and Shuster is one of our errors.

Herb on January 10, 2009 at 1:13 PM

May you live to be 176. ;)

ddrintn on January 10, 2009 at 2:32 PM

People, no matter WHO and no matter under what circumstances, no candidate for the GOP is GOOD enough, EXPERIENCED enough, have SKELETONS IN THEIR CLOSETS and are way TOO CHRISTIAN. Support the troops? THE NERVE!

Sarah is MY candidate for 2010 or 2012, for whatever she deems appropriate for her and her wonderful family. The curse follows with a wonderful blessing, and it is that the Palins have now millions of people that love them and support them unconditionally.

By far she has way more experience that the One that was picked by the MSM. It is US people, not the MSM who picks and chooses the POTUS. Why bother and exaggerate, like I have seen on TV, the clips of this interview? OMG they make her like she is borderline insane, throwing chairs and breaking all her china because she is so “spittin’ mad!

I wrote this on a prior post; Michelle, Ed/Allah and other blogosphere good guys like Drudge and Scared Monkeys should get her to do live chats with people like us so she gets a better idea, and not be so biased.

I will go see Screamfest Part Deux…delish!

ProudPalinFan on January 10, 2009 at 9:26 PM

What will be interesting in the documentary is the role McCain played in the loss and especially McCain’s staffers in how Sarah was revealed to the media and how they handled her and what she was told to say.

technopeasant on January 10, 2009 at 9:36 PM

@therightwinger –

If the GOP were to run with Sarah Palin in 2012 they would not win any more states than McCain and Dole won, and they’d probably lose a few.

The idea is to get more people to vote for you. Not less.

amen brother. If you don’t understand this then go back and listen to Ronald Reagan http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=reagan+the+speach&emb=0&aq=f# tell it like it is. He won states that are currently seen as “blue”.. why? Listen to his whole speech and you’ll know.

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2009 at 12:14 AM

The election was what, 9 weeks ago? The media bias was ridiculous, it was directed mostly at Palin, and it greatly influenced the outcome. Without Palin’s participation, this Ziegler guy wouldn’t have a movie.

Gov. Palin will be talking a lot about policy over the next 4 years, and of course her critics will say that she’s toxic to independents and she’s lost her “Hockey Mom” charm.

Her political instincts are good. Watch and see.

Mr. Wednesday Night on January 11, 2009 at 12:17 AM

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2009 at 12:14 AM

funny considering that only 4 years before he became President was also “toxic to independents and unable to compete in “blue states”

he was also considered … stupid, no knowledge of “foreign policy” … just somebody who could give a good speech … somebody who wasn’t up to speed on the details of every issue

well …

joey24007 on January 11, 2009 at 12:33 AM

I have always been fascinated by the power of words and with respect to how long one has lived on earth and whether one is a conservative or liberal how one interprets their meaning or what their take on the word is. With this in mind I would like to list ten words that apply to Sarah Palin and the different takes on them depending on the above factors:

technopeasant on January 11, 2009 at 7:42 AM

I have always been fascinated by the power of words, with respect to how long one has lived on earth and whether one is a conservative or liberal and how one interprets their meaning or what their take on the word is. With this in mind I would like to list ten words or phrases that apply to Sarah Palin and the different takes on them depending on the above factors:

WORD CONSERVATIVE LIBERAL

1)naive innocence simpleton

2)person of faith power of God delusional

3)freedom birthright outmoded

4)socialism anti-American acknowledging reality

5)Messiah Jesus Christ Obama

6)hunting/fishing rugged individualism PETA enemy

7)balancing budgets prudence abandoning the poor

8)pro-life life from conception anti-choice

9)Constitution what must be defended what must be changed

10)Christian conservative worldview villain/nemesis

technopeasant on January 11, 2009 at 8:37 AM

To follow up let me expand on the liberal interpretations and extrapolate what liberals want to do if they have the power to implement what they truly think:

1)simpleton: trailer trash; somebody elites can look down their nose at; someone not worthy to lead Americans

2)delusional: maintaining a mistaken notion or a false belief (make no mistake it is Sarah’s absolute conviction in conservative principles that has enraged liberals-thus their need to imply that Sarah is crazy or a fanatic)

3)outmoded: all this talk of freedom is no longer fashionable or superseded by something that is more efficient (dictionary definition)-we must all sacrifice our personal freedom for the ‘greater good’.

4)acknowledging reality: America must bow to the UN, European and Canadian socialism and get in line with Castro and Chavez

5)Obama is The One of the 21st c; Jesus was actually John the Baptist in preparing the way

6)Peta and libs regards all conservatives as bitter enemies because of their belief in hunting and fishing and gun rights and killing animals

7)Addressing the needs of the poor takes precedent over balancing govt budgets or sound business practices (Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae)

8)pro-life for liberals mean the conservatives want to throw women in jail for choosing to have abortions and not a philosophical position that allows an individual to choose whether babies should live or die

9)the Constitution is flawed and does not serve the current needs of America; it must be rewritten; through this rewrite America will be transformed and will no longer be racist, war-mongering or permit large inequalities of income

10)Christian conservatives need to be marginalized and for the more radical libs need to be re-educated and failing that be exterminated. Christian conservatives are more dangerous to the world than Islamic terrorists and suicide bombers.

technopeasant on January 11, 2009 at 9:19 AM

If the GOP were to run with Sarah Palin in 2012 they would not win any more states than McCain and Dole won, and they’d probably lose a few.

The idea is to get more people to vote for you. Not less.

therightwinger on January 10, 2009 at 12:50 AM

Are you sure about that?

Recall, Sarah Palin drew a crowd of 70,000 (!!!) to a rally near Ocala, Florida. A few weeks later she was regularly getting crowds of 30,000 plus in Orlando, Jax, and Pensacola area.

Florida loves Sarah Palin. I think she’d do much better than McCain in Western states too, especially libertarian-oriented Nevada, but even Oregon and most especially Washington State, which is essentially “Alaska-lite.”

ericdondero on January 11, 2009 at 9:28 AM

Look folks, it’s either do or die with Sarah for 2012. We may win with her, we may not. I tend to think we will win with her.

But nobody even comes close to Sarah as being a potential Presidential candidate for us for 2012. They’re not anywhere’s near her in support or enthusiasm level.

I know I’d be hard-pressed voting for the GOP ticket in 2012, if Sarah is not on it. I’d probably end up voting Libertarian, as I almost did this time, until she was picked by McCain.

If Sarah’s our gal for 2012, the GOP gets my vote. If she’s not, I’m 99% sure I’ll vote Libertarian Party.

ericdondero on January 11, 2009 at 9:30 AM

Well, she will probably need really good advisers since you can bet that she will have to go on every show to change perceptions. She will be hassled more than Obama in the campaign due to her perceived inexperienced, the media will go after her at every corner… She needs to be ready! Just one mistake can ruin everything!

An Era of Hate on January 11, 2009 at 9:49 AM

ericdondero on Januaray 11, 2009 at 9:30 AM

Sarah’s credentials as a libertarian supporter should have been accentuated by the McCain campaign over her credentials as a social conservative. Rather than being portrayed as a right-wing religious nut, the McCain campaign should have played up Sarah’s belief in individuals being allowed to live their own lives, being non-judgmental towards lifestyles, and linking personal freedom with lower taxes and lower government spending and fiscal responsibility.

technopeasant on January 11, 2009 at 9:50 AM

An Era of Hate on January 11, 1009 at 9:49 AM

Judging by the number of supporters already on board with Sarah I do not think that Sarah will have any problem attracting to her the best intellectual and political minds available. I think Sarah is waiting for Obama to be inaugurated (Jan, 20) before she does anything concrete, so as not being accused by the MSM of trying to steal Obama’s thunder. I predict if she is interested in 2012 she will make her intentions known by the end of February (perhaps the CPAC conference). Team Sarah currently has over 63000 members devoted to electing Sarah in 2012 and the movement hopes to have 100,000 members eventually. Sarah will eventually have to declare herself to keep these people motivated, or they will eventually stray away and find another GOP political home. I am sure Sarah knows this and will act accordingly. In addition
Sarah will never be as popular with the GOP base as she is now, unless of course she becomes POTUS.

technopeasant on January 11, 2009 at 10:00 AM

In related media news, the film classic 1984 is now public domain and available on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hATC_2I1wZE

JohnJ on January 11, 2009 at 11:20 AM

Dondero go back to the Libertarian party.
But nobody even comes close to Sarah as being a potential Presidential candidate for us for 2012. ” ..

Palin is being pushed by the liberal media to be the future of the GOP by the same media who pushed McCain as the nominee. Why? They don’t want the Republicans to have a real candidate.

When I went to my district convention I heard at least half a dozen people give speeches and say “McCain wasn’t my first pick… or even my third pick.. but he’s going to be our nominee so we all have to unite behind him” That’s what happens when we allow the liberal media to pick our candidates.

Palin is a joke of a candidate.

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2009 at 11:25 AM

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2009 at 11:25 AM

I have accused the MSM or the ‘liberal media’ of many things but one thing that I would not have the audacity to even suggest is that ‘Palin is being pushed by the liberal media to be the future of the GOP by the same media who pushed McCain as the nominee’. SP is hated by the MSM and her supporters know it. The MSM would love to destroy her. It’s called Palin Derangement Syndrome. I don’t know what makes you think that the MSM is in Sarah’s corner. Are you suggesting that Shuster is a closet Palin supporter, that Obama is secretly in political love with Sarah? That’s like saying that the European Jews supported Hitler and Nazism or the Nationalist Chinese loved Mao. I guess you can make a case for any position if you try hard enough, but as the elites like to say it is NOT intellectually honest. Quite simply the lefties hate Sarah’s guts and if they could send her to a concentration camp to be executed they would gladly celebrate that day.

technopeasant on January 11, 2009 at 12:09 PM

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2009 at 11:25 AM

you must be dense if you came to the conclusion that the media is pushing Palin in the way that they did McCain

something is not right

joey24007 on January 11, 2009 at 12:23 PM

screeeech screeeech.

bleh

Drunk Report on January 11, 2009 at 1:03 PM

Palin is being pushed by the liberal media to be the future of the GOP by the same media who pushed McCain as the nominee. Why? They don’t want the Republicans to have a real candidate.

popularpeoplesfront on January 11, 2009 at 11:25 AM

That’s not the dynamic that I see. What I see is: Palin is loved by a large number of conservatives. She is feared as an effective candidate. Therefore, she must be slimed and trashed into oblivion.

ddrintn on January 11, 2009 at 1:36 PM

Allah, Ace and many others are missing the point. It has nothing to do with Sarah. The takeaway from 2008 is that the MSM now knows that it can take down any GOP candidate with a Palin-style smear campaign. It’s not just that Palin will get the same treatment in 2012 – ANYONE we nominate will get that treatment.

Now that we know this, we must develop a strategy to fight it. I don’t know what will work – but I do know that party infighting about Palin (whom I support) at this stage of the game is counterproductive.

Missy on January 11, 2009 at 2:16 PM

the GOP has no choice but to fight back against the media … you have to do it

McCain tried to be friends with the media and they ran a story that he was having an affair

go figure

joey24007 on January 11, 2009 at 2:54 PM

Now that we know this, we must develop a strategy to fight it. I don’t know what will work – but I do know that party infighting about Palin (whom I support) at this stage of the game is counterproductive.

Missy on January 11, 2009 at 2:16 PM

I had suggested to some of our local gop “leaders” that we consider going after the media outlets. We are near a major city where a lot of them are located.

What was ticking me off was that they were not covering the Ayer’s thing at all. That phoney hack AP piece that said that there wasn’t a problem with Ayers soothed a lot of people. My thought was to get a busload of people with signs and stand outside the media locations… Signs like “Why won’t the media tell the truth about Ayers” etc.

Of course, no one had the balls to try that. Their response was the 1960′s phone banks, knock on doors and put signs on yyour lawn (which the union goons would slash as fast as they went up)

Here’s my thinking

1. The media is dependent on advertising (No, I’m not talking boycotts yet because I dont think they would work)
2. The media generates viewership because people trust them
3. Calling that trust into question will start to shake the foundation
4. A couple of hundred people noisly protesting outside their studios and newspaper hqs would be hard to ignore, especially in my city where the studios are on a major artery.

Now, if the media refuses to cover the protests, an ever increasing number of people will be wondering “Hey , why aren’t the covering the 100′s of people outside their doors?”

I also think a second strategy would be to target the local democrap and rino house members with protests outside their office. Things like “why isn’s our congressman calling for an investigation of Barney Frank??” The media could afford to not cover it for a while but again, they would eventually have to cover it.

bullseye on January 11, 2009 at 6:49 PM

Most of you guys don’t get it. The corporate media is driven by bank, not ideology. The love Palin. She drives viewership and readership number up. The more of her the better as far as your beloved MSM media is concerned. Same with Obama for the same reasons. MSM wet dream if Palin runs in 2012 against Obama. You’re giving the networks, etc. way, way too much credit.

dakine on January 11, 2009 at 8:34 PM

Most of you guys don’t get it. The corporate media is driven by bank, not ideology. The love Palin. She drives viewership and readership number up. The more of her the better as far as your beloved MSM media is concerned. Same with Obama for the same reasons. MSM wet dream if Palin runs in 2012 against Obama. You’re giving the networks, etc. way, way too much credit.

dakine on January 11, 2009 at 8:34 PM

Hmmm…but the coverage of Obama and Palin doesn’t/didn’t seem to be quite the same now, does/did it? Nope. Some “love”.

ddrintn on January 11, 2009 at 9:04 PM

By the way, we’re not giving the MSM much “credit. We just realize there are way too many idiots in the country who get their “information” from these sources alone. Which means, they’re even bigger idiots after media “enlightenment”.

ddrintn on January 11, 2009 at 9:07 PM

Palin, more ready to serve as VPOTUS the day McCain picked her than Obama 11 days before taking office.

Christien on January 9, 2009 at 3:11 PM

That, of course, is why the media consistently compared Palin to Obama in putting her down, not to Biden. The obvious order was Biden < Obama < Palin < McCain, with the middle two a close call. It’s why Biden didn’t even show up as a blip on the radar during the last weeks of the campaign — nobody really wanted to remind the voters who on the other ticket will now be a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

unclesmrgol on January 11, 2009 at 9:12 PM

The Democrats just nominated Gov. Tim Kaine of VA as the DNC chairman. All this talk of social conservatives being losers and too polarizing is a smoke screen. Karl Rove said we need social conservatives more than ever before. Better ultrasound technology is giving a different perspective to a new younger group of voters. The baby boomers are finally on their way out. The Democrats know this and want to capture “patriotism” and “family values” as part of their branding image. Tell all the moderates who think Republicans should make concessions and act more like Dems to shove off.

chunderroad on January 12, 2009 at 4:17 AM

So how qualified do you have to be to be vice president? You go to a few state funerals, you’re president of the Senate, you’re on the boards of NASA and the Smithsonian. The woman was governor of Alaska. Plus, she handles a rifle much better than Cheney…

Geoffry T. Spaulding on January 12, 2009 at 8:40 AM

Sanford-Palin = Winning 2012

Real, hard nosed, love America, bold Conservatives = 2010 Win

Mark Garnett on January 12, 2009 at 9:54 AM

Joel Mowbray wrote a column right after the election pointing out that ‘conservative voters’ provided the margin of victory for Obama-Obama garnered 20% of them. The biggest defections were among ‘secuirty moms’ and Roman Catolics as compared to 2004 and votes for Bush. He also pointed out that the Democrats now have a 7 point margin in party ID (39-32) owing to an exodus from the GOP; the biggest margin since Watergate. And finally McCain lost the Latino vote only gaining 31% of the vote while Bush garnered 44% in 2004. This all points to the financial meltdown being the primary cause of McCain’s defeat. Even Sarah attributed McCain’s defeat to it right after the election. What Sarah did was to solidify the base. Instead of McCain getting under 40% of the vote he gained almost 46% of it and won 22 states while Obama won 53% of the vote and won 28 states and the DOC–hardly a blowout but not a narrow victory either. Clearly the odds of winning the election were in Obama’s favor and he did not disappoint, if you are a Democrat.

technopeasant on January 12, 2009 at 9:56 AM

Wouldn’t it be counterintuitive if the attacks by the MSM on Sarah had no effect whatsoever on the Novemeber 4th vote and that the financial meltdown alone sealed McCain’s fate once and for all. In other words, Jesus could have been McCain’s running mate and he still would have lost. Idle speculation-perhaps!

technopeasant on January 12, 2009 at 10:04 AM

Wouldn’t it be counterintuitive if the attacks by the MSM on Sarah had no effect whatsoever on the Novemeber 4th vote and that the financial meltdown alone sealed McCain’s fate once and for all. In other words, Jesus could have been McCain’s running mate and he still would have lost. Idle speculation-perhaps!

technopeasant on January 12, 2009 at 10:04 AM

I kind of suspect that the dem ticket was the opposite of that… you know.. 333 times 2…

bullseye on January 12, 2009 at 10:57 AM

Wouldn’t it be counterintuitive if the attacks by the MSM on Sarah had no effect whatsoever on the Novemeber 4th vote and that the financial meltdown alone sealed McCain’s fate once and for all. In other words, Jesus could have been McCain’s running mate and he still would have lost. Idle speculation-perhaps!

technopeasant on January 12, 2009 at 10:04 AM
I kind of suspect that the dem ticket was the opposite of that… you know.. 333 times 2…

bullseye on January 12, 2009 at 10:57 AM

I think you meant the far left, wack job Liberal’s number was 666, right?

Of course I went to public school, so my math sucks but I know about Black heritage month and Gay rights…

Mark Garnett on January 12, 2009 at 11:33 AM

Schuster is clearly a bully, and he is clearly employing bullying tactics in that interview.

Schuster is clearly biased against Sarah Palin, and he appears to think that he is playing to his teammates at his station, as well as what appears to be those biases of the bulk of their viewers.

These stations clearly are biased and cannot be trusted for fair, balance, objective reporting.

Truly objective news reporting and analysis has died at MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, BBC, New York Times, LA Times, and others.

If it weren’t for Fox News, conservative talk radio, such as Hugh Hewitt, Rush Limbaugh, and others, and a few good bloggers, like Michelle Malkin, Debbie Schlussel, etc., and some conservative commentary authors and authors, like Thomas Sowell, Mike Adams, etc., the leftist, liberal, hate filled agenda would go unchallenged and unanswered.

William2006 on January 12, 2009 at 1:22 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4