Palin's Book = Going Bogus?

Status
Not open for further replies.
*sounds of a soda can getting crushed*
 
darkdog said:
Of course not, but the AP squandered all their credibility in regards to Sarah Palin last year. I don't remember how many emails I sent them that went ignored. A cursory review of this fact check, like what I just showed a few posts ago, indicates that once again, they're desperate to find something to criticize, whether or not it makes sense or is based in reality. Here's a response to this piece from Conservatives4Palin: Conservatives4Palin.com: Fact-Checking the "Fact-Checkers"
Click to expand...

And when was the last time any news agency ever fact checked a high profile politician's book hot off the presses in such short order as like in a few days? It took 11 AP reports to come up with "6 errors" in a 400 page book. Never in my life have I smelled so much fear that these pansies are going all out to go after Palin. She's not going to run for 2012. Why so much fear in their eyes, DD?
 
kokonut said:
And when was the last time any news agency ever fact checked a high profile politician's book hot off the presses in such short order as like in a few days? It took 11 AP reports to come up with "6 errors" in a 400 page book. Never in my life have I smelled so much fear that these pansies are going all out to go after Palin. She's not going to run for 2012. Why so much fear in their eyes, DD?
Click to expand...

so you're saying Palin's 400-page book is honest and factual?
 
darkdog said:
Because they're a large news organization and I'm a customer complaining that they're not living up to their own journalistic standards. They portray themselves as unbiased and yet they don't give their readers a fair shake. It's no different than writing any other company to complain about their shoddy products. I usually get a reply when I complain to companies in any other industry. Why should the news industry ignore their customers?
You sound like a petulant boy that sent Britney Spears hundreds of love letters, only to be ignored. They didn't ignore you; they moved on. If they replied to all the mail they receive, they would have to add a large staff of specialists just to deal with it. They are in the business of making money, not friends. Get over it.


Rush Limbaugh is one pundit, not a large news organization, and he never pretends to be unbiased. Do you listen to his program? If not, you're not a customer and if so, it doesn't make sense to complain that an openly conservative commentator is delivering conservative commentary.
Right, I forgot. Good thing he churns out hours of wonderful broadcast every week. Nothing like fanning the flames of dissenters to keep things from being done. By chance, what do you expect Liberals to do when the roles are reversed? Think they will play nice? Do unto others. Again, I am not an Obama lover. Hard to dig deep here. Since my opinions are fodder for smirking replies, not necessarily by you, who cares what I think?



So we should automatically dismiss a defense of her just because those defending her like her enough to call themselves Conservatives 4 Palin? Would you really expect a defense to come from WeHatePalin.com? At least they have the nerve to own up to their bias, unlike the AP. I posted that as a counterbalance to the AP article. It's what Palin herself linked to on her Facebook page, so consider it her own defense for now. If you find a problem with their facts or logic, feel free to address those.
Who would give an ounce of credibility to her personally recommended website to rebuff the AP? Maybe her ghostwriter owns that site.

By the way, being around a long time doesn't mean they're good at what they do. Just ask Bear Stearns or General Motors. But as I indicated earlier, it's mostly on Palin related matters where I can't trust them. I still do trust them on other things (although always with a grain of salt).
Not gonna disagree with this. Palin has been treated unfairly by both parties, IMHO. It would have been a smarter ploy to keep her under wraps until 2012, if they really wanted her to move up the ladder. Most people I knew where asking "Who is Palin?" when it was announced. McCain goofed by selecting her. He would have been better off with Pawlenty, the governor of my state. Young, smart, savvy, and successful, with a proven track record. There are some great Repubs, just not her. She needed more seasoning. Not likely to advance much higher now, since she fell for the lure of the Almighty Dollar. Her credibility is nil with a lot of people for the moves she has made since the election.
Click to expand...

So there you have it. I have even admitted that (1.) Palin is not treated fairly by the press; and (2.) There are some great Republicans.
 
kokonut said:
Palin/Cheney for 2012!
Click to expand...

really? cheney? looking at his medical condition.. I'd be surprised if he makes it to 2012. Better come up with alternative VP!
 
Jiro said:
so you're saying Palin's 400-page book is honest and factual?
Click to expand...

Her book was written to make a bunch of money. Why else? No need to keep it completely true; no need to resist embellishing some topics. It all boils down to profits.

Hey, if I write to her, expressing my doubts on her story, would she write a reply? How about if I asked nicely? Several times?
 
Jiro said:
really? cheney? looking at his medical condition.. I'd be surprised if he makes it to 2012. Better come up with alternative VP!
Click to expand...

Would make a great hunting partnership. :giggle:
 
saywhatkid said:
Her book was written to make a bunch of money. Why else? No need to keep it completely true; no need to resist embellishing some topics. It all boils down to profits.

Hey, if I write to her, expressing my doubts on her story, would she write a reply? How about if I asked nicely? Several times?
Click to expand...

I doubt she knew what was written in the book :aw:
 
I never said Dick Cheney, did I?

So narrowminded you guys are.
 
kokonut said:
I never said Dick Cheney, did I?

So narrowminded you guys are.
Click to expand...

really?

Liz Cheney floats her father Dick as potential 2012 presidential candidate.
Liz Cheney, the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, sat on this morning’s Fox News Sunday panel. The topic turned to President Obama’s respectful bow before Japanese Emperor Akihito, for which the president is being attacked mercilessly by conservatives. Host Chris Wallace aired a videotape of Vice President Cheney choosing not to bow before the Emperor in Feb. 2007, and then asked the panel what they thought of “bow-gate.” Liz saw an opportunity to make a case for her father:

LIZ CHENEY: You could also look at the comparison and think, Cheney 2012.

WALLACE: Really?! How far do you want to go with that?

KRISTOL: Let Liz make news. Cheney/Palin.

WALLACE: Or Palin/Cheney — don’t be sexist.

Liz Cheney and fellow Fox co-panelist Bill Kristol sit together on the board of Keep America Safe, an ostensibly partisan organization created for the purpose of crafting national security attack ads on Democrats. Fox, of course, never disclosed Cheney and Kristol’s common affiliation.
Click to expand...

so ill-informed you are.....
 
saywhatkid said:
Her book was written to make a bunch of money. Why else? No need to keep it completely true; no need to resist embellishing some topics. It all boils down to profits.

Hey, if I write to her, expressing my doubts on her story, would she write a reply? How about if I asked nicely? Several times?
Click to expand...

So, Obama's own book is made up of bunch of false facts, a bunch of embellishment and so on? Just so Obama could make a profit?

As for writing to Palin, you never know until you actually try it. Write to her.
 
kokonut said:
So, Obama's own book is made up of bunch of false facts, a bunch of embellishment and so on? Just so Obama could make a profit?

As for writing to Palin, you never know until you actually try it. Write to her.
Click to expand...

let's focus on Palin's book, shall we? So are you telling me Palin's book is honest and factual, yes?

btw - if you think Obama's book is bunch of hooey and lies... got any source to back it up like I backed my statement regarding Palin's book. (you can make a separate thread about it)
 
Palin STILL doesn't answer Oprah's question. "Why don't you just tell her the names of magazines you read?"

"Because I was annoyed"

Oh? She's annoyed because she was asked a simple question?!

If I was asked that simple question, I'd just say flatly, "I get most of the info from the Internet and some from Time, newsweek, and National Enquirer."

It's that simple! :)
 
Pretty simple, really. Any thing she says will be used against her by the left. So, she's smart not to delve into that area unnecessarily. Why so important about which magazine she reads?
 
kokonut - so you're saying Palin's 400-page book is honest and factual?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top