Tuesday, October 13, 2009

As the book release date gets closer, expect the Left to ramp up Palin bashing

I saw this blog article published by Zennie Abraham in the San Francisco Chronicle online edition titled "Sarah Palin "Going Rogue" will keep her out of office." Abraham's bio says that he works in the sports business world and that he's a video blogger who gets picked up by CNN. It was a very long piece and I have to ask - why are they going to this much effort to try and discredit Palin if her career is so over? That's what I keep hearing from the Left and the RINOs, that she's un-electable, a carciacture, career dead in the water, quitter, etc. Yet they keep coming out with these editorials, blog posts, articles and news stories about her.

In his post, Abraham tries to make the case for elites being the best politicians and why Palin will always fail as a politician because she is not an elite (?). Or at least I think that's what his point is.
Her new book "Going Rogue" is proof of what I've expected all along: that Governor Palin didn't want to learn how to be an effective politician at the highest levels of office. Like any member of the masses who obtains a little power and attention, it overcame the larger responsibility of governing and so she jettisoned being Alaska's leader.
What? That paragraph makes no sense. What is the "it" he's referring to? She was elected Governor of Alaska - since when is that "a little power and attention." It's the executive position of the largest state in the country. She ran it and was the first woman and youngest ever to do so. I don't understand when he says she didn't want to learn how to be an effective politician at the highest level. She was already there; she was already effective. Alaskans elected her. And how does he know what she wrote in Going Rogue - so how can it be "proof" of anything?

He tries to explain himself in the following paragraph:
By contrast, elite elected officials rise to power because they have an overarching sense of purpose that involves true social change focused more on helping people than a party or a group. The lynchpin idea of Ronald Reagan's assent to power was that government had become too large and inefficient at a time that America didn't need government spending to supercharge the economy.
So "elite elected officials" have a sense of purpose that involves true social change - not fake social change. And Palin has no sense of purpose, because she is not an elite. Got it. /sarc

He also throws Reagan in there and it doesn't make sense at all because Reagan was not an elite, but maybe that's the point he's trying to make - that Reagan is the exception to the rule because of the chance possibility that America didn't need government spending at that time (?) but Reagan outspent a lot of Presidents and increased debt so I don't understand how this fits with his argument but whatever.

Here are some more of Abraham's great ideas (all in this same post):
I fully expected Palin to resign from the GOP in the middle of the presidential campaign we're in a position where without government spending the country's financial system would have collapsed.
No Republican or Democrat in power will tell you that we don't need the stimulus program, but will tell you that money's not getting our fast enough for their areas.
That's where we are today and why so many Alaskans thought Governor Palin lost her mind when she threw back part of the economic stimulus money.
Gov. Palin has become a kind of repository for the hopes and fears of the undereducated mostly white American masses.
Palin's message is outside of that of the power elite because it doesn't help solve the problems they're dealing with.
Let's not forget this was in the San Francisco Chronicle online. They probably paid him to write this trash. This is an example of the corrupt media trying desperately to prime their audience, however shrinking it may be, for some major Palin-bashing once the book comes out. This blog post is a steaming pile of you know what and the SF Chronicle doesn't care if it's published as long as it bashes Palin. The fact that it's poorly written, contains factual errors and misrepresentations is of no importance to them. I expect nothing less from the corrupt media now and in the coming weeks.

1 comment:

Northern Exposer said...

Layeth the smacketh down!
I read that same article and was just as confused. What is he trying to get across, that a "lame-duck" politician is a joke, yet still a threat? Apparently so.

He must take his cues from Letterman, as well as the rest as the loony left.

She's certainly no threat, so let's make sure we still bash her at every opportunity.
Makes sense to me.