Sarah Palin Criticizes Newsweek’s Cover

Politico:

Palin keeps hitting out at critics:

The choice of photo for the cover of this week’s Newsweek is unfortunate. When it comes to Sarah Palin, this “news” magazine has relished focusing on the irrelevant rather than the relevant. The Runner’s World magazine one-page profile for which this photo was taken was all about health and fitness – a subject to which I am devoted and which is critically important to this nation. The out-of-context Newsweek approach is sexist and oh-so-expected by now. If anyone can learn anything from it: it shows why you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover, gender, or color of skin. The media will do anything to draw attention – even if out of context.

The woman reminds me of those politicians who constantly complain about the media’s negative reporting about them or their party, but will find every opportunity to get in front of a camera for “exposure”.   Personally, I hope the “Hillbilly from Wasilla” packs her bags and go home to obscurity.

I almost said I’ve never seen someone lie so blatantly, knowing she will get caught in her lies, but has this “so what” attitude about those lies.  Frankly I think she’s just plain irritating and as ignorant as a ton bricks.

3 Comments

Filed under Sarah Palin

3 responses to “Sarah Palin Criticizes Newsweek’s Cover

  1. Interested Bystander

    Hey All,

    I am amazed at the hatred of this woman.

    All she did was accept McCain’s invitation to be on the ticket, and she has been drug through the mud like no other person I have ever seen.

    She’s a woman who has strong opinions. Simply because those opinions do not jive with some people, she has been used, abused and lied about.

    KStreet,

    Palin reminds me of you. She has taken the heat, and came out above the fray. I hope you do not take this as bad.

    One thing that I do not understand are these “lies”. What lies? The only lies I know about are the ones told ABOUT her. For example:

    1. Trig is not her child (I still see people on other blogs suggest that Trig is Bristol’s baby, and call him Palin’s grandbaby)
    2. Palin had an affair with Brad Hanson (this allegation has NOT been proven, even though some people even claim she has admitted to it, and when pressed for evidence of her admission, they offer NONE)
    3. Photoshopped pictures of Palin.
    4. Believeing Johnson when he says that Palin called her own child a terrible name (I do not believe ANY mother would call her child what Johnson says she called Trig, do you??????)
    5. Palin spent how ever much for her wardrobe (when in fact the RNC paid for her clothes, and the clothes were then DONATED to charity)

    I’m confused as to why more women aren’t standing up for Palin, even if they do not agree with her. Sure you can do it, just preface your comment with “I don’t agree with Palin, but…….”.

    She has a RIGHT to speak her opinion.

    Like this

    • Glix

      Hey IB –

      I think a lot less people hate Sarah Palin than you think. What’s to hate about her? She hasn’t started any wars or driven the country into bankruptcy or bungled the reconstruction of NOLA. She hasn’t done anything of any consequence at all.

      The only reason she has become a public figure is John McCain picked her as eye candy for his doomed campaign. She seems to appeal to the far right fringe but
      has no future in national politics.

      Yep, there are lots of rumors around about her but there are lots of rumors around about anyone who continues to seek the spotlight. Tom Cruise is gay… Ann Coulter had a sex change operation…Michelle Obama ranted about whitey.

      Like this

  2. kstreet607

    IB, below are the links to my two latest posts about Palin. Please keep in mind that everything is fact checked and double checked by the authors of the lists that I blogged about.

    If President Obama’s detractors were as thorough with fact checking instead of throwing out innuendos and lies just to see what will stick, perhaps I would not be such a loyal constituant.

    Anyway, I’d prefer you not go point by point in your reply. Perhaps a summary of each article would suffice. I think many readers are similar in their taste for a “quick read” as opposed to a long drawn out reply, IB. I hope I am not offending you. Its basically a known fact about the internet. Even I have tried to make my articles abbreviated, (with the exception of the LIST of lies.)

    http://kaystreet.wordpress.com/2009/11/18/sara-palin-lies-before-the-book-documented-by-andrew-sullivan/

    http://kaystreet.wordpress.com/2009/11/18/sara-palin-lies-in-the-book/

    Like this