Palin's Bad Relationship with the Press

Bill Keller, editor of The New York Times, has written a thoughtful article about Sarah Palin's relationship with the press. It's worth reading in its entirety, so I'll only excerpt one paragraph:

... Palin’s disdain [for the press] goes beyond the bitterness of a public figure who has been burned by the press. Plenty of others have endured the pain of mainstream-media excoriation but have remained civil and responsive. What these politicians have in common, though, is enough confidence in the strength of their ideas to imagine that they can make a case through the press, if not actually to the press. Perhaps one key to Palin’s dislike of the news media is a streak of intellectual insecurity, or a trace of impostor syndrome. Her best defense against being found shallow is a strong offense. ...

So, does anyone think she'll run? With this sort of relationship with the press? Read what Keller had to say about Ronald Reagan.

Republicans and Historical Revisionism - We shouldn't be surprised that Palin and her minions tried to twist history to suit her view

Robert Schlesinger at U.S. News & World Report has written something interesting about Republicans' tendency to alter history to suit their own views. Schlesinger begins:

Listen my children, and you won't be failin' basic American history like Sarah Palin. Hardly a man is alive who is not aware of the former vice presidential candidate's recent quote, uttered with little care. The great patriot, she rambled, "warned the British that they weren't gonna be taking away our arms, by ringing those bells and making sure, as he's riding his horse through town to send those warning shots that we were gonna be secure and we were gonna be free."

Thus was ignited the second battle of Lexington and Concord, with Palin and her partisans exchanging volley after ridiculous volley with not only the press but history itself. She insists that she knows her history better than those fusty, liberal old lamestream historians. (Joel J. Miller, author of The Revolutionary Paul Revere, wrote in the certifiably conservative National Review Online that "From Revere's own account, it's clear that he didn't fire a shot, he didn't ring a bell, and he didn't intend to warn the British of anything," adding, "In short, Palin basically got the whole story wrong.") [Vote now: Is Palin making a mistake by standing by her Paul Revere statements?]

Palin's minutemen made their stand on Wikipedia, editing Revere's entry there to fit Palin's view of reality. The whole squabble perfectly reflects a political culture where such absurdist rejection of reality has become endemic—especially on the right. It used to be said of conservatism that it stood athwart history and yelled "stop." Increasingly it seems to stand beside reality while hitting the "edit" button. [Check out political cartoons about Palin.] ...

Schlesinger goes on to describe Republicans' editing impulse on medicare, economic history and tax cuts, and the debt ceiling. Schlesinger's description of the tax cuts and budget deficits really illustrates best how out of touch with the reality of their own policies the Republicans actually are.

Schlesinger's article is "Republicans Edit History on Paul Revere, Taxes, Debt:
Rejection of reality has become endemic to politics—especially on the right."

How will Sarah Palin's successor play on SNL?

Alexandra Petri observes in "Michele Bachmann, the GOP debate and the SNL Palin factor," in part:

... Caricature tells more than portraiture about the features of a face. Look at Tina Fey’s star-making turn as Sarah Palin on “SNL.” Ideal meat for parody is someone who is funny without knowing or noticing why. That was Palin in a nutshell. Her whole selling point was not what she said but how she said it. She seldom said anything at all, so this was a good side to emphasize. You could fit most of her theses into the navel of a gnat and still have room for six caraway seeds and the social value of the exercise of looking through her e-mails. Helicopters! Wolves! Russia! She was as funny as you could be without being an actual joke. It just took Fey’s knowing delivery to push her over the edge. ...

... But what about Bachmann, whose star-making turn as The Lady With 23, Count ‘Em, 23 Foster Kids and Who’s Gonna Make Barack Obama A One-Term President, has left everyone wondering how it will play on “SNL”? ...

Will "SNL" ever be as much fun again?

A 'scathing' film about Sarah Palin is on the way

Politico's Molly Ball is reporting:

Nick Broomfield, a well-known British filmmaker, is “close to finishing” a “scathing” film about the former Alaska governor and GOP vice presidential nominee, according to the Los Angeles Times. ...

... Palin’s parents and several former aides appear in the film, in which she is portrayed as a “ruthless politician who has trampled over opponents,” the Times reports. ...

... Best known for “Kurt & Courtney,” a documentary about the late grunge rocker Kurt Cobain and his widow Courtney Love, Broomfield’s subjects have also included former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, Hollywood madam Heidi Fleiss, American serial killer Aileen Wuornos and the rappers Biggie Smalls and Tupac Shakur. ...

The Los Angeles Times article, linked-to in Politico's story, mentions that Sarah Palin did have something to do with the creation of "The Undefeated:" "While Palin does not appear in the film [The Undefeated], the site Real Clear Politics reported that she helped coordinate interviews for it."

For more about the pro-Palin film, ABC News has "Sarah Palin Filmmaker Wanted to Debut Documentary in the Field of Dreams.

I wouldn't worry about the pro-Palin film swaying the undecided. Most people have made up their minds about Palin, and American audiences are sophisticated film-goers, aren't they? They know it's the editing that makes or breaks a film, don't they? Someone could take the pro-Palin film's raw video and tell quite a different story with it through the magic of editing.

There is not much happening in Palin-world this morning, unless people consider it news that palin-bots are assembling their own cache of Palin's e-mails. It's just like film editing: people can insert, delete and move frames, just like they can e-mails, and have a narrator say anything they would like to have said.

Andrew Sullivan's Two Options

Andrew Sullivan wrote in "The Day Trig Was Born," in part:

... It seems to me we have two options. It's possible that Palin simply made up her drama of labor, or exaggerated it for effect, when in fact it was a routine, if rare, pregnancy, and she had mild warnings that the birth may be premature, and she gussied that up into a tall tale of her pioneer spirit, guided by her doctor, who refused to take the NYT's calls as soon as Palin hit the big time. I think that's the likeliest explanation, given the sheer world-historical weirdness of the alternative.

But it's also possible that she never had that baby at all. I mean, if you read the emails and independent reports above and were asked if this woman were in labor with a special needs child, and that her water had already broken, would you believe it? Just put all the facts in front of you and ask yourself that question. ...

Sullivan recognizes that it is possible that Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig Palin and even states that it is likely that she did. I agree with him, because no one has proven that she did not. Like Sullivan, I am inclined to believe that what has commonly been called the "wild ride" -- the trip from Texas to Alaska just before the birth -- is nothing more than a tall tale; however, I would not go so far as to say, like Sullivan, that Palin told the story, "guided by her doctor, who refused to take the NYT's calls as soon as Palin hit the big time."

The "investigation" into the "faked pregnancy" is like one done by The Keystone Cops. It is completely amateurish. The "investigators" don't obtain original, source material; for example, in "Sarah Palin and The Neonatologist - Part Two - POW!" a poorer picture was used than one that is available at the L.A. Times; one attributed to an Associated Press photographer, by name!

All of the "photo proof" -- one way or the other -- should have been analyzed by a professional, who would have asked the photographers questions like: What was the lighting? How far away were you from the subject? Which camera was used? What was the focal length of the lens? What size is the camera's sensor? ... . And a professional investigator would have asked for the pixels from the camera, knowing that news organizations often tweak a photo in order to get publishable contrast and color values.

Some will say, "Look! Here's a photo showing that she wasn't pregnant;" ignoring or dismissing photos that tell a different story; and ignoring a very important fact: If you added up the exposure times of all the photos taken of Palin during that time, they probably wouldn't amount to an hour out of her life, if that. It typically takes less -- much less than -- one second to take a photo. There are 3600 seconds in an hour.

Well! Believe it or not! I'm a neonatologist now, too. I've written about a newborn.

Debate in New Hampshire: Palin conspicuous by her absence

A debate between candidates for the 2012 Republican nomination will occur in New Hampshire tonight and be televised on CNN at 8 PM (eastern).

Sarah Palin will not be there. Michele Bachmann, who is poised to steal Palin's conservative support, and Ron Paul, the clear heir to her libertarian support, will be there.

The Los Angeles Times' "It's Mitt Romney and the rest as candidates debate in New Hampshire" has some interesting polling news, and CBS News' "The Republican debate: 10 things to watch," where this post's photo was obtained, attempts to size-up the debate before it occurs. Vanity Fair's "Tonight’s Republican Debate Podium-Order Rationale Revealed" states that the candidates polling the best will be placed in the middle of the on-screen lineup.

Will the other candidates go after Mitt Romney or will all of them gang-up on President Obama? North Carolina's Times Union reports that the President was in N. Carolina today, working on what may be his only obstacle to re-election: Jobs.

The debate, tonight, will be especially interesting to Republican activists and primary voters, who are searching for a good-looking and good-sounding candidate. Those people will decide who the nominee will be and will be comparing what Romney has to say about the issues important to them with what Pawlenty and the other candidates have to say about them. If Palin isn't there, she won't figure in those discussions.

Update: "Michele Bachmann announces presidential campaign" -- CBS News

Update: CBS News' "GOP debate: The winners and losers" has some opinion about the debate, as well as links to several other debate stories.

Burning Toast: Sarah Palin's toxic relationship with Lyda Green

The L.A. Times is writing about Lyda Green (former Alaska State Senator) and Sarah Palin, and the Times is using Frank Bailey's e-mails to understand some of the material redacted in Palin's e-mails. In "Sarah Palin emails: Relationship with Senate president grew 'toxic'," the paper states:

... In his memoir "Blind Allegiance to Sarah Palin," former aide Frank Bailey says Palin's relationship with Green started going downhill in 2007 when Green called for an audit of a flailing state-run dairy that Palin had sought to save from closure.

"A relationship that was once cordial grew toxic,” Bailey wrote. “As a result, Green had to be dealt with. When she decided to run again for the state senate seat in late 2007, Sarah actively plotted against her, even suggesting in an email, 'Hey—Ivy even lives in [her] district come to think of it!'" referring to aide Ivy Frye. "'Never hurts to rumormonger.'" ...

... "Differences and any show of disagreement on policy dissolves into, for her, a disagreement on personality," Green said in a 2008 interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow. "And it becomes personal very quickly.”

By April 2008, Palin became convinced that Green was the one spreading rumors.

It started with a rumor that Palin's daughter Bristol was pregnant, which Palin traced back to Green’s office. (Bristol gave birth to son Tripp in late December 2008.)

"Flippin unbelievable," she wrote. "Wouldn't you think they'd be afraid of being proved wrong when they rumor around the building like that?...hopefully it'll be another reason why reporters and the public can't trust that odd group of strange people."

A week later, press aide Sharon Leighow reported to Palin: "Lyda’s office was also spreading a rumor a couple of days ago that [Chief of Staff Mike] Tibbles had a panic attack this week and [Deputy Chief of Staff Mike] Nizich had to take him home.”

"Oh flippin geez," Palin replied. "That was probably when he went to his doctor’s appt to get his [REDACTED] checked out? What is wrong with these people.”

The conflict seems to have tainted even the most uneventful of encounters between the two warring offices. ...

Seemingly, one of Lyda Green's aides assumed at one point that Sarah Palin was cooking breakfast in the capitol building. How will we ever know whether Sarah burned the toast?

This feud was a colossal waste of Alaskan taxpayer dollars. Both Green and Palin are Republicans. Remember, it was the Governor and Senate President feuding.