If anyone can be expected to have no love for the liberal, legacy media, it’s former Alaska Governor and GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. The character assassination, insults and slander leveled at her during the 2008 campaign were textbook examples of “the politics of personal destruction.”
So a new book from Palin – even one about Christmas – should have some sharp barbs for the newsroom partisans of New York and D.C. Palin does not disappoint.
“Good Tidings and Great Joy: Protecting the Heart of Christmas,” published on Tuesday, Nov. 12, is a counter-attack in the ongoing “War on Christmas.” In it, Palin repeatedly bashes the what she’s long called the “Lamestream Media” (LSM) and called upon readers to “ignore it.”
From the beginning, Palin is clear about where the media stands on the annual assault on the holiday and especially it’s religious underpinnings. “The battle for Christmas is more significant than the sneering media will lead you to believe.” Palin cites “an ACLU letter warning a school district not to sing “Silent Night, or when a college group isn’t permitted to advertise a Christmas tree sale,” to, “when “Merry Christmas” is replaced by the more politically correct “Happy Holidays”— all to avoid giving offense.”
In the differing ways they treat the sides in these cultural battles, the media are signaling their allegiance, according to Palin.
Now, imagine for a moment the hysterical laughter that would ensue in the Lamestream Media if people from a pro-family group filed a lawsuit against the news networks claiming that, for example, the shot of Roseanne Barr grabbing her crotch while screeching and spitting through our national anthem at a Padres game made them physically ill. Or imagine what would happen if Christian parents filed a lawsuit against a public school because their children felt nauseated every time the teacher referred to “Mother Nature” instead of God in their Earth Day materials. The media, of course, would treat those types of lawsuits with utter contempt. They’d characterize the plaintiffs as religious nutcases, too soft and weak-willed to handle a pluralistic society. Yet, the American Atheists were treated with respect as the LSM dutifully reported on their efforts to remove Christ —or even the memory of the steel cross of 9/ 11— from the public square.
As for the “Lamestream Media’s agenda,” Paln highlighted, “They want the world to believe that an atheist customer who’s outraged over a ‘Merry Christmas’ greeting at the store is a hero, whose feelings are more important than a Christian customer who gets ticked over a ‘Happy Holidays’ greeting.”
Straying from the Christmas theme, Palin cited media coverage of the Chick-fil-A controversy as characteristic of their bias. On Aug. 1, 2012, Chick-filA-Appreciation Day boosted the chain’s nationwide sales 30 percent. The media, Palin wrote, “swept the amazing success under the rug, while promoting a ‘same-sex kiss-in’ that turned out to be a gigantic flop.”
“Of course,” she pointed out, “there was little mention of the small turnout on network news.” She concluded, “The media speaks for itself and not the masses. Ignore it.”
Out of the three networks, Palin called only NBC out by name. Palin focused on “NBC’s liberal medical editor,” who appeared on “Today” to speak about “Christmas anxiety.” The editor unabashedly stated that rather than expectations or commercialization destroying Christmas, “I think religion is what mucks the whole thing up.” Palin retorted, “Can you imagine the uproar if an NBC guest had said, ‘Islam really screws up Ramadan. We should be concentrating on weight loss during our daily fasts, not Allah Akbar.’
But, not to worry, as Palin decided, “It just wouldn’t ever happen, because NBC would invite on a guest who actually practices the religion and would ensure the guest demonstrated at least a modicum of sense and respect.”
Sense and respect? Not something Palin – and other conservative women – have often received from the media.
