McCain has always been a media favorite. As one of the true professional media hounds inside the Beltway, the establishment media has swooned over the "Maverick" for years, much to the consternation of his Republican adversaries. See Romney for President Campaign; Bush '00 Campaign.

That the luster is starting to wear off is no surprise, if you have been paying attention to the scandalous lies concocted by Rove's disciple for the McCain campaign: Obama supported "comprehensive sex ed" for kindergarten; Palin never supported the Bridge to Nowhere; Obama dodged a military hospital to go to the gym; you get the drift.

Even McCain had to drop the claim on the Bridge to Nowhere today.

Palin charged rape victims for rape kits
$300 to $1200

Washington Post above "hit-piece"

Palin wanted guns in bars ?

Palin wanted bars open to 5:00 am ?

Thats pro family

Simeone, when I was a kid there was a rumor flying around that Nixon was for school on Saturdays. It was just some liberal who hadn't grown up's way of getting kids to like HHH. I didn't have to get too much older to figure out what was going on.

Here's hoping you too, will catch on some day.

Factual reporting becomes "hit pieces" for those who's eyes are blinded by love or those who's job it is to get Beauty and the Beast into the White house.

"Some of them may actually respond by leveling direct, aggressive challenges at the McCain-Palin ticket."

Catch up, friend. That's been going on for weeks - months, in some quarters.

Now the question is, when do they begin challenging the Obama/Biden ticket?

Monique, I guess you were sleeping when we went through the following press feeding frenzies;

Obama's preacher
Obama won't salute the flag
Obama's wife hates America
Obama's supporter Rezko is a crook
Obama is dissing the Clintons
Obama wouldn't visit the wounded troops without a camera crew,

and I could go on, but I think you get my point. Say what you will about Obama, he has been in the crosshairs of the press corp for as long as Palin as been governor. You can't really believe he has escaped press scrutiny, can you?

You said: "That's not unexpected. What's surprising is how very Old Media the column sounds. As far as I can tell, it's now an open question as to whether candidates "desperately need" the establishment media to communicate with voters. Those massively successful "The One" ads grew their buzz on the Internet, which is a force that The Press can no longer ignore, and which by its very openness exposes egomaniacal twists of the truth — whether out of liberalism or revenge — as politicking masked as journalism.

Yet bloggers- not unlike right wing radio talk jockeys- always seems to need -desperately? - the old media to enable their thoughts (blathering). Most of what you do on AR is a counterpoint to the MSM. Where would you be without it? What will the future blogging / yakking be like if the old media is shit canned. No more journalistic standards. No more actual reporting. You don't do that. In fact, you wrote that you knew of no standards for blogging. I think your blogs relevance is intrinsically tied to the OLD MEDIA. Without it your comments would be nothing more than a popgun fart.

>>"I guess you were sleeping when we went through the following press feeding frenzies..."

Not really. Many of the stories you listed weren't broken by the MSM. They were reported on AFTER they had been reported in other forums.

The media is biased. It has been for quite some time. The public is just now waking up to it.

I give kudos to the McCain campaign for mounting a vigorous defense of Sarah Palin. If they hadn't gotten the facts out directly to the American public, the MSM was prepared to rip her apart and "Qualyze" her all in the name of "vetting" her.

Unfortunately for them, they'll now have to focus on Palin's record rather that her daughter's child or fueling rumors about book burning.

Anthony,
Palin needs vigorous defense desperately. In fact it needs be so vigorous that it twists the facts. Tell me about, for example, Palin charging rape victims $300 to $1200 for rape kits. Tell me about her attempt to fire the local librarian because she "didn't support her mayor". That's Nazi stuff and it should scare the hell out of anyoune who isn't a Nazi at heart. Come to think of it, it's probably why she doesn't scare you.

Finally, this from Depak Chopra

Palin reinforces the overall message of the reactionary right, which has been in play since 1980, that social justice is liberal-radical, that minorities and immigrants, being different from "us" pure American types, can be ignored, that progressivism takes too much effort and globalism is a foreign threat. The radical right marches under the banners of "I'm all right, Jack," and "Why change? Everything's OK as it is." The irony, of course, is that Gov. Palin is a woman and a reactionary at the same time. She can add mom to apple pie on her resume, while blithely reversing forty years of feminist progress. The irony is superficial; there are millions of women who stand on the side of conservatism, however obviously they are voting against their own good. The Republicans have won multiple national elections by raising shadow issues based on fear, rejection, hostility to change, and narrow-mindedness.

Sorry, OTL, I don't see it that way.

The librarian (Mary Ellen Emmons) was notified about being terminated at the same time the pubic works director, the police chief, and the city museum director/finance director were told that they would be history as well.

Emmons had been an outspoken supporter of Palin's mayoral opponent and had been appointed to the city libarian job by Palin's mayoral opponent.

I believe Palin probably tried to fire Emmons because Emmons backed Palin's political opponent, not over a disagreement over the books that sat on the shelves of the city library. But that's politics. I doubt the next Governor will keep Carcieri's cabinent members either.

So is that something bad? Or is it just the winnner's perogative to choose his or her employees in the executive branch? I suppose it depends on who you ask.

Given that Palin never tried to ban any books, more than likely, Palin just wasn't thrilled about spending city dollars on a salary that would then be used by the recipient to oppose her in the next election.

So if you're trying to get me to believe that Palin fired the librarian for political reasons, I'd probably buy that.

But if you're trying to get me to believe that the librarian was fired for refusing to "ban books", I think that is severely stretching the truth.

I don't know much about the rape kit issue. Feel free to enlighten me. Assuming it is true, I'd suppose that it was a financial decision. Some of the questions I'd have are: How do other towns handle the issue of payment for the kits--ts it common practice to charge victims? Were there federal or state funds available that Palin thought should be used instead of town funds?

If Wasilla made victims pay for rape kits, I'd disagree with the decision, but I'd need to know more information.

My own assessment of Palin's budget record is that she is not opposed to spending taxpayers' money when they're not HER constituents. She was willing to seek state funds when she was mayor and was willing to seek federal funds when she was governor. But she always took care of her "own" constituents and kept their costs down. Frankly, I don't have a problem with that because it was her job to look after her own constituents.

I've defended Bob Walsh's actions on the same basis. He was trying to promote for his union members even though I believe his efforts negatively impact the state. I believe it the failure of the General Assembly to prioritize the best interest of the public.

But after all, we do live in a democracy and its up to the voters to ensure their voice is heard. Just ask Steve Alves.

OTL,
Following up on my last post, do you have any more information on the rape kit questions I posed?

Or am I left to assume that it is yet another falsehood being spread to discredit Sarah Palin?

Anthony,

I almost posted on the AP report with the rape kit line when it was fresh but decided that it didn't merit mention; the story was long on insinuation and short on facts (which I didn't have time to research).

The synopsis is that during the time that Palin was in office, rape kits became an issue in Wasilla, and the state passed a law forbidding the practice of charging rape victims for the tests (which local or state police typically covered). Whether the practice existed in Wasilla when Palin came to power, the report didn't say. Whether the policy came from the town council (or however that all works in here town), the report didn't say.

It did quote the then-police chief as saying that the reason he opposed the statewide ban was because the police attempted to recoup the costs from insurance companies, where possible. Whether that means the town would cover the costs (rather than passing them on directly to the victim) when the insurance would cover them... the report didn't say.

In short, it's the usual leftist spin to state as fact that "Palin charged victims for their rape kits."