Newsweek's Jon Meacham thinks that Governor Sarah Palin is too much a commoner and too stupid to be allowed to become vice president of the United States of America and apparently his employer agrees with him. The October 13 cover of Newsweek features a close up photo of the Governor with the headline "She's One of the Folks (And that's the problem)," and Meacham writes the accompanying cover story. Be clear about what this means: This is a direct attack on Mr. and Mrs. America. We are all too stupid to be president in the elite opinion of Jon Meacham and Newsweek magazine.
Meacham finds Palin to be incurious, unprepared, and even finds it "dangerous" if she were to become our vice president but he offers us nothing but his opinion to judge by. And it's all because she doesn't measure up to his personal standards. Sadly for Meacham's elitism, however, Palin easily satisfies the standards that the Founding Fathers set as criteria for stepping into the highest office in the land. Curiously, Meacham does not once mention the actual Constitutional requirements to run for office in his entire sarcastic attack on Sarah Palin. Like most of his ilk, the Constitution seems meaningless minutia to him.
To be sure, there is an argument raging among the iliterati concerning who should be allowed to be president or vice president and it all centers on the experience issue. Whether a long resume of government positions makes one "qualified" for president or not has taken center stage, especially since Gov. Sarah Palin was chosen for his VP candidate by John McCain. Hypocritically, this "experience" issue didn't bother these same members of the chattering classes when Barack Obama announced his quest for the White House with his less than 200 days in federal service now behind him. But now these same worriers find themselves suddenly concerned.
Before we begin, we need to find out the true qualifications for president of the United States as we see in the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1:
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
That's it. The Founders wanted no test, no requirements but these so as not to restrict the people in their choice. They, unlike someone like Jon Meacham it turns out, trusted the American people.
Early in the piece, Meacham sets up the argument in favor of Palin, yet even as he does he attacks.
A key argument for Palin, in essence, is this: Washington and Wall Street are serving their own interests rather than those of the broad whole of the country, and the moment requires a vice president who will, Cincinnatus-like, help a new president come to the rescue. The problem with the argument is that Cincinnatus knew things. Palin sometimes seems an odd combination of Chauncey Gardiner from "Being There" and Marge from "Fargo."
This is but one of the many slams that elitist Meacham engages in here. Not to belittle the selfless life of Cincinnatus, but to merely assume that he "knew things" and that this assumption somehow speaks against Palin hardly passes the smell test. In fact, the figure of a Cincinnatus does, indeed, seem to elicit a comparison with Sarah Palin. But Meacham does not elaborate on the "things" Cincinnatus "knew" and why it is that Palin doesn't measure up. He assumes that a mere dropping of an ancient Roman name will be enough to convince that he's on to something.
To elaborate for the uninitiated, Cincinnatus is known as the Roman dictator that left his small farm to lead Rome to victory in a short war and then, in a perfect example of public virtue, resigned his dictatorship and returned to his plow. He is known for simplicity of life, virtue in duty, and fairness in leadership. He is not, however, known as some great philosopher king. He was just a dutiful, humble citizen that knew how best to get the job done. Why is Cincinnatus so much different than a Sarah Palin? In any case, Meacham doesn't bother to say, leaving the charge hang there unexplained.
The crux of Meacham's argument is in favor of elitism of a sorts, though he claims it is not one of station.
Is this an elitist point of view? Perhaps, though it seems only reasonable and patriotic to hold candidates for high office to high standards. Elitism in this sense is not about educational or class credentials, not about where you went to school or whether you use "summer" as a verb. It is, rather, about the pursuit of excellence no matter where you started out in life. Jackson, Lincoln, Truman, Eisenhower, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan and Clinton were born to ordinary families, but they spent their lives doing extraordinary things, demonstrating an interest in, and a curiosity about, the world around them. This is much less evident in Palin's case.
Meacham argues that the past presidents he mentions were so obviously more qualified by their "pursuit of excellence" and that Palin has no such history. But, for many of those he mentions, we only know of these pursuits in retrospect. At the time they ran, several of those Meacham mentions were just as blank a slate to the public as he claims Palin to be to us now. Lincoln, Truman, Eisenhower, Johnson and Ford were all thought to be either extremely common of intellect or not well educated by most people when they achieved office. In fact, in Andrew Jackson's case, he was quite uneducated to which any look at his writings can quickly attest (Spelling and punctuation was unknown to him it is obvious). That they all turned out later to have been misunderestimated is the stuff of history, but using these folks as arguments to prove Palin's unfitness for office is rather shaky grounds.
Meacham even attacks Palin for presenting herself as one of us.
Even devoted Republicans doubt whether the Sarah Six-Pack case is the best one to make. After the vice presidential debate, a senior figure in the party, who asked not to be named because he was telling the truth, told me that Palin should talk less about being "just-folks" and more about being governor of a large state.
I love how Meacham asserts that this unnamed source was “telling the truth.” Telling whose truth is the question that remains unanswered.
William F. Buckley, Jr. once famously quipped that he'd "rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University." This remark, albeit a humorous one, holds the germ of true American principle at its heart and it is a principle that Meacham is arguing against. For his part, Thomas Jefferson agreed with Buckley's intent that the common American was suited for any office in the land, a notion that the Meacham's of the world seem to be arguing against.
Jefferson once said, that "whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government; whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights." The election of a Sarah Six-Pack like Sarah Palin can easily be considered a corrective action by the American people tired of being ridden by those imagining themselves “born booted and spurred" to dictate the terms of our lives from on high.
The main problem with Meacham’s position is that it would tend to create a permanent political class from which we would draw our leaders. This is a concept quite outside of what the Founders wanted.
Then Meacham conjures up the death of McCain as so many are wont to do.
... it is only prudent to ask whether she is in fact someone who should be president of the United States in the event of disaster. She may be ready in a year or two, but disaster does not coordinate its calendar with ours. Would we muddle through if Palin were to become president? Yes, we would, but it is worth asking whether we should have to.
Besides his pronouncement that she is stupid, we really don't find much in Meacham's column to doubt Sarah Palin's capacity to be president. We have to take as given that she is unfit because he does not really do much to settle the question. Assuming he's right, maybe it would be a bad thing to have a Sarah Palin as next in line for the Oval Office. But, there is nothing in this piece that compels one to agree with Meacham's premise. He fails to prove his case.
He saves his best slam for last; she's "dangerous."
I could be wrong. Perhaps Sarah Palin will somehow emerge from the hurly-burly of history as a transformative figure who was underestimated in her time by journalists who could not see, or refused to acknowledge, her virtues. But do I think I am right in saying that Palin's populist view of high office -- hey, Vice President Six-Pack, what should we do about Pakistan? -- Is dangerous? You betcha.
As far as ninety-nine percent of the country was concerned, Abe Lincoln, the rough-hewn western hick, was a surprise as president. Few people respected Andrew Jackson as an intellect. Truman was thought a country bumpkin. Ike was perennially depicted as a golf-playing dunderhead and Ford the well-meaning fool. In retrospect they turned out to be far better than their detractor's worst claims. Meacham wants us to see Palin in the same dismissive light that these American presidents were cast in until they proved their mettle. Sure we should seek a good, qualified candidate. But why is it that Palin isn't one?
If Meacham meant to convince us that Palin presented the worst-case scenario that was suspected in past American leaders, he failed to do so. But he did insult every normal American out there as he made the attempt.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I would prefer Gov. Palin's friends in Lincoln Bedroom
October 6, 2008 - 07:09 ET by ZachJonesIsHomeWHO WILL BE SLEEPING IN THE LINCOLN BEDROOM IN
AN OBAMA WHITEHOUSE? This is a serious question that has captured my attention.
The question is in reaction to what almost everyone sees – a media blatantly
refusing to report on legitimate issues and distorting anything or anyone who
stands in the way the Obama election efforts. How many reporters are looking
for people who can tell Obama’s story? I’m not sure anyone can without damaging
Senator Obama. Go to: http://zachjonesisho...
zachjonesishome.wordpress.com
What will they be smoking in the Lincoln Bedroom?
October 6, 2008 - 07:58 ET by kg"Forget change, I want improvement!"
But does barry Meet the Criteria
October 6, 2008 - 07:09 ET by sjanus11I'm still waiting for the Birth Certificate. I believe that is one of the requirements. Born in Kenya....I don't think so...........Let's see it barry. Not some fake the kos kids made for ya. Steve
"If your 20 and not a Liberal, You have no Heart. If you are 40 and not a Conservative, You have no Brain" Sir Winston Churchhill
Why has no one forced him to show his birth certificate?
October 6, 2008 - 07:59 ET by kg"Forget change, I want improvement!"
Are Birth Certs...
October 6, 2008 - 09:21 ET by ontheright...issued and/or certified in Kenya?
fix it sjanus11
October 6, 2008 - 08:53 ET by JoelCTI agree with your comments, but fix your end-line there. "If you're 20..." or "If you are 20..."
Kind of spoils your post.
What about John Edwards?
October 6, 2008 - 07:17 ET by blueskyWhat about John Edwards? I never hear his name mentioned. He was a trial lawyer with one term in the Senate (and he wouldn't have been re-elected), but no one ever questioned his experience or asked him stupid questions (what magazines/newspapers do you read) to be president or VP.
Liberals Dish it Out ...
October 6, 2008 - 07:33 ET by allanfIn Newsweek we have a nasty liberal attack on Palin. On CBS we have another liberal opining 'Down and Dirty' Palin Like Agnew with 'Nasty' Attack on Obama'
I would say that these
October 6, 2008 - 07:36 ET by USA4freedomI would say that these people are too stupid to run a magazine. Which direction are subscriptions going??
Ronald Reagan, 1962: I did not leave the Democratic party, the party left me.
Insert: your name, 2008, and the Republican party.
Need ask?
October 6, 2008 - 07:50 ET by mikefiskWhich direction are subscriptions going??
My money's on "toward Iran."
Two Words Destroy Meacham's Argument ...
October 6, 2008 - 07:35 ET by allanfLyndon Johnson
Qualifications for leadership
October 6, 2008 - 07:39 ET by AmericanEnergistThis is a diverse country. Because someone is not Ivy-league trained does not qualify her or him for office. Shrewd, common sense beats elitist ponderings every time.
Leadership requires courage of convicions. After all, we do not rely on the choices our leaders have made - unless they are mostly wrong. It is the conviction that resonates with the voters. If we believe that a candidate has this courage to pursue their ideals that we approve, they will get votes.
When the liberal elite pile on someone like Gov. Palin, they show their glaring intolerance for the 'rest of us'. Unfortunately for them, it's the collective work of 'regular' folks that keep them in their positions. Instead of analyzing how Gov. Palin rose to her position today, they are quick to dismiss her as 'stupid'. If they were to fully examine the rise by their hero, Sen. Obama, they would find an erie, calculated climb in a currupt political machine.
Personally, I hope they continue to spew their hatred because it identifies them as the true clueless members of this country's electorate.
www.ArmchairEnergist...
Some say the new attack
October 6, 2008 - 07:44 ET by bobthemanSome say the new attack strategy is not going to work for McCain.. I disgree.. I think it will to a certain extent. However, with the media in the bag for Obamassiah, I think it might be too little too late.
It pains me and millions of Americans to see this man strole into the WH with the smugness of a cat who just ate the bird...but short of an October surprise, our worst fears realized are less than 30 days away.
http://politicsofdes...
Libs
October 6, 2008 - 07:45 ET by ForbusI thought the Liberal mantra was that Republicans were too priviliged. GB1 didn't know how to work a grocery scanner, etc.
The Left has sold its soul (however small that may be) to win this election.
Honestly...
October 6, 2008 - 07:47 ET by mikefiskI've lost my patience with Newsweek, and anyone who considers them a legitimate news source. When I can get more even-handed political coverage from The New Republic and Mother Jones than I can from Newsweek, something's amiss.
Just I won't be missing Newsweek.
Meacham is an educated snob who mistakenly...
October 6, 2008 - 07:52 ET by ThalpyMeacham is an educated snob who mistakenly believes that leadership requires aristocratic lineage. Don't get me wrong, Meacham is an educated man; he's just not that intelligent. Leadership would be out of the question for him. and recognizing leadership potential eludes him as well.
Most of the preppies feel this way. Try as they will, they can't hide their delusions of natural superiority for long. Its essence just oozes out. It's odd, but most of us, the vulgar many, pick right up on it. As dumb as we are, you would think that it would slide right by. So, the age old process continues; they're not as smart as they think they are, and we're not as dumb as they think we are. Maybe.
What About Barack?
October 6, 2008 - 08:09 ET by ChasvsBut Newsweek doesn't have a problem with a Racist, Marxist Lying Bastard?
Yeah, that's what we need. An Empty Black Suite who plays the Race Card and is known to associate with people who HATE our Country!
STOP Obama NOW!
Meacham finds Palin to be
October 6, 2008 - 08:20 ET by Jack BauerIt is ironic that Meachump should think this.
My OED defines incurious as: not eager to know something; lacking curiosity.
Doesn't this describe the elite MSM, of which Meachump himself is a card-carrying member, in respect to their incurious behavior regarding Senator Obama and his rise to his current position.
On just about everything? His past. His mentors. His beliefs. His land deals. His pals.
For instance, has Meachump and Newsweek shown ANY curiosity about Obama's college years? How did he get into Columbia. What happened to his 1984 thesis on so-called "Soviet Union disarmament." What did he think of the socialst conferences he attended.
Where is there one piece of evidence that he actually attended Columbia as the pretigious body has REFUSED to offer any evidence of his time there. And Obama refuses to even disclose the names of those with whom he attended that college.
How did he get into Harvard? What did he write whilst there? Who paid for that? A radical Muslim Saudi billionaire with funds laudered by a radical American Muslim?
In fact, can Meachump and Newsweek point to one act of curiosity about Senator Obama that may cast a the merest scintilla of doubt on his suitability to be a legitimate candidate for the Presidency?
I'd be curious to know.
Evidence Obama not a citizen
October 6, 2008 - 12:47 ET by Ten7sThere's quite a bit of evidence that Obama was born in Kenya to an American below the age of 19, and is thus, not a citizen, not able to be POTUS if elected.
http://news.justia.c...
someone finally filed a lawsuit - at least we will find out
October 6, 2008 - 12:54 ET by Dee Bunkat least we will find out one way or another now. Personally I think it would be too good to be true
Why is it?
October 6, 2008 - 08:21 ET by ConLosRepublicanosNoWhy is it
that the MSM hate ordinary Americans? Why is it they think ordinary Americans
are stupid? Why is it that they think ordinary Americans need to be led, but
they can't lead? Why is it that they think ordinary Americans are racists? Why is
it that they think ordinary Americans are dangerous? But seem to miss the light
about who is the real danger to America.
Finding the answers to this question may not be difficult but I don’t think is elitism,
its just simple stupidity. Ordinary Americans built this nation and they seem
to forget that’s where they live. If ordinary Americans were stupid as the
media claims there would never have been a United States of America, as well
as the right every single person that lives in this nation has. If ordinary
Americans need to be led but can’t lead the principles this great nation has
would have never existed on the face of the earth. The truth is ordinary
Americans are the last hope this nation has and they need to be waken. Ordinary
Americans do know how to lead they know how to make great thinks, as evidence
by the great constitution that no one in the face of the earth has been able to
match. The same constitution that gives the enemies (the media) of America hopes
that they can change. If ordinary Americans were dangerous this nation would
have been destroy a long time ago. But no it is still standing strong, no
matter what Barry or anyone says, and is the last great hope these world has. If ordinary
Americans were dangerous people like Barack Obama would not stand a chance at
winning the presidency. People like William Ayers would not be teaching or indoctrinating
at a local university. People like Wright or Phleger would not have a chance to advance their radical agenda. And
last if ordinary Americans were as the media portrays them The United States of
America would have never existed.
Vote for
McCain/Palin 2008 to get the real change and a chance to vote for
Palin/whomever 2012.
No way,
No how, Nobama 08. Keep your radical agenda to yourself.
Weren't liberals all for
October 6, 2008 - 08:23 ET by suzycreamcheeseWeren't liberals all for the common peanut farmer Jimmy Carter back in the seventies? I was just a kid, so maybe my memory isn't as clear as it should be. I just remember a feeling in the country that it was such a noble American ideal for a citizen of humble beginnings to make it to the White House.
Have Obama's grades been released? Wonder how much of a true brainiac he really is. What schools one attends and the grades one makes aren't really a true measure of intelligence. One of my favorite writers--Harlan Ellison--had a negative grade point average in college and dropped out. He's a brilliant writer.
Democrats
October 6, 2008 - 08:25 ET by WR JonasIf John Meacham thinks Sarah Palin is too unqualified then how about these State Executives.
Kathleen Blanco Democrat Gov.Louisiana . Utterly paralyzed and rendered into a zombie by Katrina Mayor Ray Nagin Democrat New Orleans .Let the entire city drown without evacuating . Mayor KwameKilpatrick Democrat Detroit. Lewd , lacivious and criminal conduct in office . Governor Elliot Spitzer New York Democrat. Used the money and prestige of his office to gratify his sexual lust.
This is just a starter list . I am sure Mr. Meacham could smear these people as easily as a respectable mother of 5 and a successful wife, woman and Republican Party candidate.
WR
October 6, 2008 - 08:54 ET by cocodrieUnfortunately I am familiar With Blanco and Nagin. You could have included our Jefferson Parish president Aaron Broussard [DEMOCRAT] who sent the drainage pump operators out of town for Katrina and caused half of Jefferson to flood. All of these people are democrat friends of Refrigerator Jefferson of New Orleans.
Newspeak
October 6, 2008 - 08:54 ET by CrashNewspeak once again fails to do anything more than foreword an idiotic notion floated by the race baiting, baby killing, women hating left. Obama and the MSM tore Hillary a new pant suit and Bill is on the warpath. If only McCain would press these issues. Hell a halfwit third party candidate could have won support with this strategy.
This election is about character of which McCain and Palin have plenty. Yet for this late in the race Obama's character, as well as, the democrat leadership have both gone unanswered.
It seems to me that if McCain asked the question "who is Obama?" Not even his staunchest fanatics can answer. The question's that need to be asked constantly over world history are, "Who is Adolf, who is Joseph, who is Mahmoud, who is Obama?" Finding out who they are after their charisma lures their prey into a snare is dangerous.
It is a long list of Constitutional ignornce - MSM, VP Joe, etc.
October 6, 2008 - 09:05 ET by JayTeePretty soon Readers of the MSM publications need to look through FACT CHECK before digesting their articles.
But simple errors like this are immediately recognized as "Democrat Facts" and need no further "digestion"
The Republican Revolution will not be Televised
Palin needs an ad like this...
October 6, 2008 - 09:06 ET by retroconThe main stream media want you to believe that Sarah Palin is not qualified to run for VP because she is, in fact, very much one of you. They want you to believe that the greatest qualification is to be an Ivy League graduate. Well, Ivy League graduates haven't done so well up to now. But there is one point the MSM makes that is worth listening to, apparently, they believe in this statement, from George Orwell's Animal Farm:
"All animals are equal, but some animals are MORE EQUAL than others."
And thats the problem
October 6, 2008 - 09:14 ET by BluegillThat did it for me, can't bring myself to read that rag, had to throw in the (and thats the problem) didn't they. I guess all us country bumkins in middle America are the problem, please enlighten us since all the Liberal Havens are doing SO well. NYC, Detroit, MA, CA , THAT is a great example to follow?
Could they Zoom in any closer
October 6, 2008 - 09:16 ET by BluegillTry to make it as creepy as possible I guess.
The "elites"
October 6, 2008 - 10:41 ET by iveseenitallMeacham evinces ignorant elitism at its worst. These people grab the mantra of the "elite" with nothing to support it. Many, if not most, of them have no understanding of true intellectualism. Most of them are as shallow as a puddle. Most of them never take action to fix something; they ( as Obama) simply talk. They also lack common sense. Witness the educational system in America-- a complete failure. So what makes them feel "elite"? --their money and their assinine "liberal" ideology. Some of the dumbest, most poorly educated feel "elite" as they make fools of themselves every time they open their mouths. Witness Rosie, Maher, Olbermann, Matthews, et. al. Witness Hollywood. Witness the MSM. They are not even wise enough to accept any part of the conservative point of view, even when it comes from those smarter and more educated than they. Because they haven't the ability to respond intelligently, they become condescending, vindictive, and petty. As do this clown, Meacham, and the editors at Newsweek. Sad.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Wow
October 6, 2008 - 09:41 ET by Wildcatter1980After Palin's debate performance, one would think that Newsweek would attribute "too stupid" to Senator Biden.
Oh and by the way. Note to Meacham: If you want the rest of the nation if not the world to think you are a "fair and balanced" new publication, when should we expect the stories slamming Obama, Biden and McCain? Also, will the pieces on Biden and Obama list in exhaustive detail their gaffes, plagiarizings and highly questionable associations?
Newsweek editor
October 6, 2008 - 10:39 ET by iveseenitallThe editor of Newsweek was on O'Reilly recently. With an air of haughtiness, he denied their bias. The abhorrent, lousy "liberal" liar. "Liberals" make you sick!
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Good ol' liberal sexism.
October 6, 2008 - 10:58 ET by wiwfGood ol' liberal sexism. Liberals trying everything and anything to crawl their way to the top.
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
Appearance on the Factor
October 9, 2008 - 11:29 ET by Wildcatter1980That was the inspiration for the "Note to Meacham" portion of my comments.
if palin had bombed last thursday ...
October 6, 2008 - 10:59 ET by pmohbucki'll bet this column wouldn't have been published ... there is an obvious fear that palin may tip the balance ... it's amazing how once-respected magazines like time and newsweek have drifted so far away from the integrity that made them worthy subscriptions ... now they are nothing but printed blogs with a few pictures.
we subscribe to it, because my wife is a teacher and it's only a $12/year subscription for her ... i'm wondering if i can convince my wife to exchange the subscription to ... playboy. for about the same price, we'd get better written articles ... and better pictures. lol
We can play this game
October 6, 2008 - 11:08 ET by Clear thinkerWe can play this game too...
Newsweek is too stupid to be allowed to publish a magazine.
Fuhrer Obama Hitler Youth
Making Fun of AGW http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/
If you really want to know the strategy of Obama and the MSM...
October 6, 2008 - 11:54 ET by jkmatyiIf you really want to know the strategy of the Obama camp and the
Democratic party for the next 60 days, then I suggest you read "Alinsky's Rules for Radicals"
Known as the "Father of Modern American Radicalism," Saul D. Alinsky
(1909-1972) developed these strategies and tactics to focus the
"emotional energy of grassroots groups and transform it into effective
anti-government and anti-corporate activism". According to Jerome R.
Corsi (The Obama Nation) this is the very same strategy that Obama has
been using to further his political career from the early Chicago days
all the way to the present presidential campaign.
As Alinsky has advised:
RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize
it." Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy.
Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than
institutions.
So, don't be surprised when they continue to attack our VP nomination
of Gov. Sarah Palin by attacking Sarah, her family, her favorite foods,
etc. From now on you know that whatever they attack in earnest, this is
their weak point and they know it.
Welcome to the World of Obama and Change. As to the media, they have
decided that Americans can be led around like sheep. If Obama wins,
they may be right. They are the 'elites,' of course they know better
than all of us in "Fly over Country."
Newsweek?
October 6, 2008 - 14:46 ET by RHRobinsonMDSo a magazine that three years ago was so irresponsible that it published a false story about Guantanamo interrogators "desecrating the Quran" that led to worldwide riots and more than 16 deaths calls Palin "dangerous"?
First, what is it you want us to pay taxes for? Tell me what I get and perhaps I'll buy it. - Robert Heinlein
Journalists too stupid to have so much influence
October 6, 2008 - 16:48 ET by nkviking75As this site documents, a large percentage of journalists are too elitist and too stupid to have so much power. They're also "incurious and unprepared", pontificating on a variety of issues they don't understand and failing to do research beyond the Daily Kos or the Huffington Post or whatever dribbles in from lefties in faxes and e-mails. They keep many in the country ignorant by screening out whatever facts challenge their agenda.
It's obvious that someone needs to watch the self-appointed watchdogs in the MSM.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
The MSM
October 6, 2008 - 17:52 ET by RHRobinsonMDIt is obvious that conservatives cannot "befriend" the traditional media and convince them to be impartial. They are not neutral and no longer pretend to be. Given that this truth is becoming more self-evident to more people as time progresses it is necessary to place them where they belong - in the enemy camp - and treat them as such.
Pushback against the MSM is essential and effective. They want and need things from the McCain/Palin campaign as well as the RNC. Can't have it - access, preferential treatment, respect, help with travel arrangements - gone.
More importantly the push back needs to be PUBLIC. Attack them consistently and forcefully at any opportunity, expect public (voter) support. We have no choice, they ARE part of the opposition and must be treated as such.
"Mrs. Palin may not know as much about the world as Mr. Biden does, but at least most of what she knows is true." - WSJ
Newswreck!
October 6, 2008 - 17:47 ET by tomchrisDon't you love how conservatives are always depicted on the cover of these weekleys. When Obama burst on the scene, did any photographer depict him with nearly half his face shown in extreme close-up? Naaah! But as far as the easy on the eyes Palin- you betcha!
What a childish game.
Halo?
October 6, 2008 - 18:24 ET by RHRobinsonMDTheir cropping of the photo also cut off her halo.
"Mrs. Palin may not know as much about the world as Mr. Biden does, but at least most of what she knows is true." - WSJ
Newsspeak
October 6, 2008 - 19:39 ET by RHRobinsonMDAs pointed out by Tim Blair (yes, THAT Tim from Oz) in the Daily Telegraph from Sydney:
http://blogs.news.co...
The article, by Jon Meacham, is … odd:
One page later:
So she’s qualified. Clever editing, there.
He even stole my tag line
"Mrs. Palin may not know as much about the world as Mr. Biden does, but at least most of what she knows is true." - WSJ
Desperately, media once again jumps on the age issue.
October 6, 2008 - 21:06 ET by KBDayWhen all else fails, mass media jumps on the age issue with McCain. I've seen "actuarials" and other calculations. But consider the actuarials regarding Sen. Obama, who technically falls into the highest risk group--African American males (I call him African-American because that is his campaign's preferred descriptive).
So if we're worried about vice presidents becoming presidents, can we go ahead and theorize the disaster Joe Biden would be as president?
I am really tired of media bias. Really. Has Obama offered a look at his health records or birth certificate?
best, Kay B. Day
newsweek
October 6, 2008 - 22:58 ET by livingfreeHey Meacham~I don't have a subscription to your lousy rag, wish I did so I could call you and tell you to put it where the sun don't shine. McCain/Palin, rip that empty suit apart. Can't stand the man and people can call me racist all day long dosen't bother me at all.
Get over yourselves already your sick puppys.
Livefree or die trying
Dear Newsweek: Thanks for reminding me what America IS.
October 7, 2008 - 05:19 ET by BigDumbApeI just want to say that I resent -- no, let me state this far more forcefully -- I really HATE everything that people like Jon Meacham, the staff of Newsweek, and the rest of today's biased media are trying to ram down the throats of the American people in this election, certainly in terms of what they want to see happen now and in any future elections as well.
I grew up believing America was a shining example of freedom for all. That America was a country of the people, by the people, and for the people -- that those words stood for something, for an ideal that we should all aspire to with every breath we have. Speaking for myself, my parents were classic Middle Class people. They worked hard, played by the rules, and struggled to achieve what they did. They worked long hours, got up early and packed bagged lunches, and saved every penny they could to send me to college. They taught me right from wrong, and in my own life since I've tried to work hard and do the right things in their name. Because when I look back on what they did and what they gave me -- or should I say what they had to give up and sacrifice to give me things -- I can honestly say I was blessed to have them as my parents.
Personally, above all else I consider myself to be an AMERICAN. Yes, like many others, I'm generationally part of the American "melting pot" since all four of my great grandparents came from various spots in the globe. But I don't want any hyphenated name describing or defining me. I'm not "something-American." I was born and raised here and this is the country I love. I'm American, plain and simple.
And let me say this: one of the things I hold most dear are the rights and freedoms our Founding Fathers gave to us. Because when you stop and think about the incredible sacrifices that people made during the American Revolution to even create this country -- or think about the fine men and women who have served ever since to keep our nation secure, to keep it's liberties protected -- it's pretty damn hard not to get a lump in your throat or to feel a tear build in your eye.
But the one thing that I've always thought was most amazing (historically speaking) was that when the American Revolution was over and our Founding Fathers had to sit down and actually create a framework for our country to operate by -- in other words when they drafted the U.S. Constitution -- that they realized this country was created to OPPOSE any sense of a monarchy or privileged elitism. Instead, they recognized that this country was born on an idea of freedom, and it was forged by the blood of simple farmers, blacksmiths, stable operators, and so on. It was bound by the sacrifices of ordinary men and women, young and old. And as a result, they realized this country should always belong to those self-same "common" people and it should be run by them, too. Because it's in the heart of the "common" citizen that the spirit of America will always reside and always find its flame eternally burning.
So, with a firm and unshakable belief in that, our Founding Fathers set two simple rules that a person had to meet to become President. I quote their wisdom:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
That was it. No rules that you had to be rich. No rules that you had to come from a powerful or politically connected family. No rules that you had to have traveled abroad to prove your worldiness. No rules that you had to have attended an Ivy league school. No, for all the requirements that they could have set, instead they went with two simple rules to ensure that this country would always belong to the "common" people who spilled their blood to found it in the first place.
So, I just wanted to thank Jon Meacham and NEWSWEEK magazine for sharing their elitist and holier-than-thou article with the rest of us. And speaking as an Independent voter, most of all I want to thank them for reminding me WHY I've chosen to vote for John McCain this time around, for a man who served his country honorably in so many ways, right down to shedding his blood like our Founding Fathers did.
I'm voting for McCain because Heaven help us if elitists like Meacham, Newsweek, today's biased media, and certainly Obama himself get their way. Heaven help us if they successfully manage to take this country away from the "common" people. Because the day that happens truly will be the day that the spirit of America and all that it was built on will be dead.
That's all I wanted to say. I'm sorry if I wrote too much. I'm new here, but nothing has boiled my blood this entire election season as much as reading tonight about this Newsweek cover story on Sarah "she doesn't deserve to be elected because she's too common" Palin. Just thinking about Americans writing such elitist and condesending words about ANY fellow American that chooses to run for an elected office makes me sick to my stomach.
Great reply. Thanks for
October 7, 2008 - 05:52 ET by Warner Todd HustonGreat reply.
Thanks for posting.
Cover-The original vs. a little retouch
October 8, 2008 - 15:35 ET by FryeYou can see a great dissection of the cover photo that was completely untouched by Newsweek's photo editors. It shows the original photo and how it would look with just a few minutes in Photoshop.
Before & after