Palin the punching bag

When 2008 presidential candidate John McCain announced that Sarah Palin would be his vice president running mate, the media went into attack mode.

Palin was called stupid and unqualified, among many other things. Saturday Night Live wasted no time making spoofs on Palin’s infamous Katie Couric interview. Bloggers and columnists everywhere opined that McCain had lost his mind for partnering up with a complete dud.

Perhaps McCain didn’t put enough thought into his choice. Regardless of his reasoning, the election was two years ago, and I can’t help wondering why so many media outlets won’t shut up about Palin.

I wrote about this issue back in November 2009, when political blogs still wouldn’t give Palin a break.

Sure, she’s in the public eye, so she’s undeserving of a “break.” Even so, why does anyone find it necessary to continue bashing Sarah Palin’s every move? Is she the new George W. Bush?

Why does the Huffington Post have to pick apart Palin’s tweets and linguistic deficiencies to an obsessive, unhealthy degree? We get it: She invents words. This is newsworthy, how?

Film critic Roger Ebert spends his days tweeting about the absurd things that Palin says:

Palin is so malevolently wrong-headed here it’s like rabid trolling.

My reader @VampHag4Life: Of course Palin would use the word “shackles” when defending another idiot’s “right” to yell N.

Palin is already working with debate coaches to train her to never, never, ever use the word “quitter.”

I’m not here to defend Palin’s honor. As a political figure, it’s her duty to expect the flack from commentators, news stations, writers, and voters.

Palin opponents are trying to prevent her from running in the 2012 election. I can understand this completely, but I’d just like to see the media cover relevant issues rather than constantly batter Palin, who has become the nation’s punching bag.

Palin jokes have been boring and outdated since October 2008. Now, it’s just embarrassing that pundits and other media contributors continue to chew her, and this says so much about their utter lack of creativity.

Find somebody else to sick on. The nation could use some variety right now.


7 thoughts on “Palin the punching bag

  1. I can understand them continuing to bash her since they are focused on readership. People read it, people still talk about it, so why not feed them what they want? It is pathetic that people want to continue reading about that nonsense, but the population, in general, loves reading up on gossip and negativity. Makes them feel better about themselves.

    1. Nikita,

      You’re correct. It’s a vicious cycle. The media feeds “lamestream” commentary (as Alex Dalenberg put it in the above post) to willing viewers. Not only do people feel better about their own flaws when they hear about Palin’s latest faux pas, but they feel as if they’re staying informed with current events.

  2. I agree Laura; the attention over single thing Sarah Palin does is way overblown, especially considering she is no longer an elected official, but more of a conservative figurehead. I think it’s a symptom of the GOP being out of power. The Right has President Obama and his family’s every move to nitpick (vacations, apparel, etc.), but there is no defined Republican leader for liberals to point as as a symptom of everything that is wrong and unholy about the other side. But because Sarah Palin is probably the most famous GOP-er alive right now, I think she does fill in as the “bad guy” for liberals in place of George W. Bush.

    Here’s the question I have to ask myself down here in southern Arizona (especially as Palin may weigh in on a congressional primary race I’m covering every day): Does Palin matter? Or is her continued exposure actually a creation of her much reviled “lamestream media” – something that makes a lot of noise, but doesn’t actually have of import. If Palin’s endorsement can move the needle with voters, especially conservatives, if what she says really matters to, and affects the behavior of, southern Arizona voters, then I have to pay at least some attention to what she says and does. If she’s a genuine, powerful political force, I think some attention must be paid.

    1. Alex,

      I honestly don’t think that Palin’s actions matter all that much, at least for right now. Until she runs for office, she shouldn’t receive the amount of press she’s currently getting. Considering the fact that she’s no longer a political official, there’s no grounds for paying her so much attention. Quite frankly, I just think she’s the person to pick on at present.

  3. I think the reason Palin is still in the media is because she throws herself there. She runs to news outlets to get her voice across, she says the most ridiculously stupid things, knowing the media will attack. And all she does is attack the media when they call her out on one of her many lies. Even though she is not an elected official, the only reason being she quit halfway through her term, she likes staying in the public eye. And as long as she’s putting herself out there, it’s the media’s responsibility to call her on what she says. She’s not allowed to say whatever she wants, and when someone points out she’s wrong, cry she’s a victim of the ‘lamestream’ media. Oh and I would be thrilled if she ran in 2010, because then maybe once for all people would see how dense and empty she really is.

    1. Isaac,

      I don’t think Palin is qualified to be president either, but I still think it’s dull of political commentators to keep coasting of Palin jokes and criticism. After a while, it was unoriginal to pick on GW Bush. Well, it’s unoriginal to trash Palin, and the fact that these pundits keep doing it proves that they’re lacking in the creativity department.

      While I agree with you that Palin sets herself up to be mocked (her tweeting), the media needs to get more interesting and find a new person, or ISSUE (what a radical concept) to cover.

      How about pay more attention to the NY mosque placement, midterm elections, Iraq war, oil spill, or economy?

  4. If she didn’t make herself such an easy target, she wouldn’t be attacked as often. She chose to abandon her job and the trust of the people of Alaska to make millions as a public speaker. She chose to compare herself to William Shakespeare. She chose to support Laura Schlessinger in the wake of her insensitive comments on syndicated radio. Her political views are boilerplate conservative, but she accuses others of being “extremists”.

    I don’t understand why Palin’s opponents wouldn’t want her to run for President in 2012. As one of those “freedom-hating” “extremist” Democrats, I would LOVE to see Palin forced to come up with solid electoral policy positions and rhetoric, and then reconcile those with her public statements since 2008. She’s more divisive and less politically savvy than Hillary Clinton or John McCain, and they couldn’t beat Obama. It’s easier and more popular to rail against politics than to actually participate in it. Palin understands that. I think she won’t run but instead find satisfaction charging $300,000 for speaking engagements.

    If you think that liberals have chosen her because of a lack of other grist for the mill, I have two words for you: Michael Steele. The GOP basically locked him in a closet until his term as party chairman is up for precisely this reason: his boorish behavior, tactless comments, and managerial incompetence is hurting the still-recuperating Republican brand. Even by politicians’ standards, he’s a real piece of work. I’d love to see more Steele jokes, but it seems like only Stephen Colbert seems to give him much attention.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s