The commentary on this website is being accused of severe liberal bias regarding Sarah Palin, some warranted and some just total bullshit. Part of the problem is the media and almost everyone else doesn't exactly know what to make of the decision, so they're throwing everything at the wall in hopes of some kind of consensus sticking. Nobody is denying the pro's to the pick, that it solidified the conservative base, from gun-owners to pro-lifers to fiscal conservatives. But there's more to it than that, just like there was with Joe Biden. Biden has his own pro's and con's but for the most part his life for the last 30 years has been played out publicly. Biden is a political absolute: you know exactly what you're going to get from him. Palin is not. NOBODY vetted this woman, McCain's people included. So it's difficult to blame the media or more specifically this website for jumping on every detail, even if it's more negative than positive, because it's all new.
And in a world (R.I.P. Don LaFontaine) where bad news sells and every detail is scrutinized, I'd say discussions about a VP picks ongoing investigation, daughter's hidden pregnancy and relative lack of experience are pretty fucking obvious newsmakers. If the New York Times article is true, and McCain did in fact want Lieberman or Ridge and settled for Palin, well that's worth talking about too, just like it was worth talking about why Joe Biden went from thinking Obama was inexperienced to presidential. If McCain's such a maverick why did he fold to the demands of his conservative base on such a huge topic? And why wasn't Palin vetted as thoroughly as she should have been, before the media smelled blood and started digging for any kind of dirt?
The truth about Sarah Palin is that ultimately she'll do exactly what every VP does: add roughly a fraction of a percentage point to the ticket. But any type of negativity Palin brings about won't reflect poorly on her, but rather McCain, who is beginning to have a hard time striking a balance between maverick and party man. Should we care that her daughter's pregnant? No. Should we question the reasoning of a ticket that preaches abstinence in the face of the pregnancy? I would. Just like I'd have a question or two about a "reformer" under investigation in her home state. These aren't little things, and to couple them with a person who has a year and a half worth of experience as the governor of a state with a population the size Memphis, Tennessee; well that's kind of hard to ignore. Sarah Palin raises a lot of questions for a lot of reasons, questions she herself can quell with a fine performance on the campaign trail. But they're still questions that have to be asked, because we just don't know. So if you're going to bitch and moan about bias then you better have some pretty goddamn good answers to these questions. Or at least do a better fucking job than this guy.
there is no bias going on w/ how Gov. Palin is being covered by the media. the media is comprised of sharks who strike when there is any shred of blood in the water.
as a populas, are we supposed to ignore the fact that the only foreign policy experience, which is the McCain campaigns keystone point, is that she was part of a movement that wanted to turn her STATE into a FOREIGN COUNTRY.
Tucker Bounds can you just answer the question asked rather than regurgiating the same tired McCain rhetoric.
Posted By: some guy (Guest) on September 02, 2008 at 02:11 PM
I was one that "accused" this column of bias, and I stand by that. I don't have a problem with you or anyone else posting a blog with your political opinion. Really I don't, but when Ashish's column leads off with the statement that "It's pretty safe to say now that the Sarah Palin VP rollout has been the worst VP rollout in awhile..." well that's not news, that's clearly an opinion, not a fact, so don't get all up in arms when people accuse you of being biased. You can be as biased as you want, it's no skin off my back, whether I agree with you or not is a non-issue. If your ideals show through in your writing, and people pick up on that, why get defensive? It's not your job to be "fair and balanced". Who cares?
Posted By: Alan Kay (Guest) on September 02, 2008 at 03:18 PM
You start your article with the pretense of refuting the accusations of the blatant liberal bias of this website then finish it with unwarranted attacks on Sarah Palin. I think you proved the accusations are correct.
Governor Palin has a 17 year old daughter who is pregnant. Her daughter has decided to keep the baby and marry the father. This should be compared to Obama's statment that, if his girls made a mistake, he wouldn't want them forced to be burdened with a child. Sign him up for parent of the year!
As for the Alaska Independence Party, Governor Palin has been a registered Republican since she turned 18. The AIP is not all that much of a fringe group in Alaska - it just sounds that way to us in the lower 48. As an Alaskan politician, it's totally appropriate for her to reach out to other groups. Apparently, you libs don't really respect other's views, as you claim.
Finally, she's accused of trying to get a brother-in-law who mistreated her sister and threatened her father fired. The libs ignore the fact the decision to fire him was made without her knowledge. Like everything else in society, libs seem to think the brother-in-law is not responsible for his actions which led to his termination - there must be some conspiracy behind it! Of course, no mention is made of Obama's brother living in a hut in Africa, who Obama ignores. If the accusations are true, which fair-minded people can surely realize they are not, at least Governor Palin was doing something to help her family.
Posted By: JeremyL (Guest) on September 02, 2008 at 03:33 PM
Is this website seriously concerned that it may have a liberal bias all of a sudden? I don't think Ashish has taken Obama's plums out of his mouth in the last year. I thought this website tried as hard as it could on a daily basis to demonstrate that it does have a massive pro-Obama bias.
Posted By: Shizzle (Guest) on September 02, 2008 at 04:03 PM
"The commentary on this website is being accused of severe liberal bias "
This website is actually one of the MOST bias websites I have ever read when it comes to politics.
It would be nice if you guys balanced it out and had some conservative writers or even someone in the middle.
But most of the stuff (99%) of the politics section is liberal propaganda at it's worse.
According to 411mania Obama = Jesus Christ
Posted By: Kevin (Guest) on September 02, 2008 at 04:34 PM
You know fellas I did start the column by saying some of the bias accusation is warranted. The point the column was trying to make (I suppose unsuccessfully) was that the extraordinary coverage of Palin isn't liberal attacks but rather the bi-product of poor vetting. But to say at any point my article attacks Palin is just stupid. I raised some legitimate question for which there may be legitimate answers, I just haven't heard them yet.
Posted By: Bryant Daniels (Registered) on September 02, 2008 at 06:41 PM
What was John McCain thinking? Did he know anything about Sarah Palin before he chose her to be his VP?
Is he trying to sink the GOP?
Posted By: John (Guest) on September 02, 2008 at 07:37 PM
"it would be nice if you guys balanced it out and had some conservative writers or even someone in the middle."
For what!?!? Last I checked you could read whatever you want so if you choose to come here then you hoose to suck it up and read what they write. Nothing wrong with your opinon but when you say it would be nice if they blanced it out thats like asking the country music channel to balance things out with some Rock or hip hop. If you looking for balanced find a site that is more balanced and stop wasting posting space about how things would be nicer if they were more balanced.
Posted By: Flint (Guest) on September 02, 2008 at 09:39 PM
I'm sure Bryan and a lot of others on the site are really sorry that they don't make up a bunch of good things to say about the GOP so a couple casual readers who obviously have not lived on the planet for the past 7+ don't feel bad about their continued support of the absolute worst Presidential administration ever. You can't make up reasons to go to war, run up trillions of dollars of debt, not read your own memos leading to a major terrorist attack, sit on your hands while a major American city drowns, claim to hate big government and then expect to dictate the religious, sexual, and moral decisions of free Americans, discriminate whenever you feel like it based on whatever archaic tome is handy, and wave the flag while you wipe your ass with the Constitution. The party's over, the carriage is turning back into a pumpkin. You had a lot longer run than you should have had. Be glad that the true Americans who will be taking over are tolerant and forgiving and hope that they can clean up the mess you guys made before it's too late.
Posted By: Tranc (Guest) on September 02, 2008 at 10:57 PM
Bryant,
Read up about three posts to what I said and you'll have your legitimate answers.
Posted By: JeremyL (Guest) on September 02, 2008 at 11:05 PM
STAY CURRENT