There is nothing I can write that will articulate how completely gratifying it was to just watch Glenn Beck nail Republicans to the wall with his CPAC speech. I was on the edge of my seat for the full hour—no teleprompter—no lags—no rhetoric. Beck laid out the facts as skillfully as Indiana Jones evading the rolling ball. I had just flopped on the bed, turned on the tube and he walked onto the CPAC stage—talk about perfect timing! I wish I'd had the presence of mind to record it—hopefully Fox News will replay it tonight! Every American child would do well to watch it.
I have felt since discovering Beck on CNN (the only show I could bring myself to watch on that network anymore) that he is the BEST history teacher I never had in college. Thank you Glenn Beck for having the courage to use the CPAC platform to lecture the Republicans on the same things that millions of us who watch him and/or listen to you daily already know. I am confident that those who "hate Glenn Beck" but have NEVER heard this true patriot speak, are scratching their heads tonight because he made so much sense. Yes, he is always that good. Yes, he knows his history. Yes, he backs up all of his books with outstanding bibliographies. Yes, I am a "Beck head." (But if you think I'm a "blind" devotee, read my criticism of how he handled Debra Medina of Texas on his radio show in an earlier blog.)
Glenn Beck is the epitome of the modern day, self made American man success story. He has his finger completely on the pulse of how average Americans are feeling. Oh, that one person in our government would speak as eloquently, plainly and forcefully with the conviction, consistency and passion of this first class, self educated, and home schooling dad broadcaster. Bravo to Beck and bravo to Fox News for hiring him so he could become the voice of real Americans from sea to shining sea. A very grateful and awake America is watching! I'm proud to be just one of those Americans.
Showing posts with label Fox News. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fox News. Show all posts
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Glenn Beck deserves criticism today for Medina Interview
I've had a few days of not being motivated to write. Yep, I know Iran is nuclear, president Clinton and Alec Baldwin were rushed to area hospitals today—I wish them both well BUT Glenn Beck (and I cannot believe I am writing this) was completely and totally OUT OF LINE today on a radio interview with the third (and relatively unknown) third party republican candidate for governor of Texas, Debra Medina.
I had written to both Sarah Palin's facebook and on my blog in earlier posts last week asking why Sarah Palin was not supporting Medina (who was said to be an 'independent minded" "Scott Brown" "tea party" type of candidate.) It was a sincere question—it was not posed because I am a supporter of Medina. I, as a new Texas voter in this primary, am eagerly trying to discern WHO would be the best choice for Texas going forward. I have ruled out Hutchison because I can SEE she is "big" Washington government and I don't want anyone tainted by an association there in the past 10-12 years bringing their big spending to Texas. I heard 10 minutes of the democrat governor's debate and after they refused to answer "yes or no" to vouchers, I became so infuriated at the double speak, I turned the debate off—more spending, more money into the failing schools. The democrats are done. I already LIKE Rick Perry. In fact, if I was "not" engaged in seeking out more info, I would vote for him without even looking into Medina. Why? Because I am a Nuevo Texan.
Rick Perry's governorship of this state is precisely why people like me are fleeing California for the lone star state. We moved her just 3 years ago. In many ways, I find that my husband and I appreciate living here and see the wonderful differences in Texas culture so clearly because of what we saw happen to our state. Rick Perry has been governor for the past 10 years, since George W. Bush (another VERY popular governor) ran this state. Austin, Texas is simply a GREAT place to live. There are no potholes in the streets. There is no litter. Wonderful zoning rules keep restaurants and businesses next to the highways, where you can easily see (and frequent) them and puts the homes in the beautiful hillsides of Austin. The air is clean and beautiful here. We have 5 world class universities and colleges within driving distance of the capitol. There are oak trees for miles, longhorns, farms, wineries, antique stores, parks, lakes and trails galore. Connected to all of this natural beauty is the city—yes, a growing city, with the local hippies resisting the new high-rise condos and the poor folks east of the 35 highway, where a regentrification is under way posting cardboard signs that read "rich yuppies' moving here. Here, we have the usual problems with saving some form of wildlife (like a blind salamander) so the roads don't go through to accommodate the growth—thereby releasing exhaust fumes into the "clean" air instead—as motorists and families bringing more business to all of these hippies and tree huggers protest. You know—they want to live here but they don't want YOU to live here. Texas is a LOT like California in this regard and that is NOT a good thing.
However, with a fiercely independent streak and a desire to be responsible in growth, both sides seem to be working together (most of the time) to keep Texas from turning into California while welcoming the growth that is bringing jobs, an entrepreneurial spirit and college students from all over the country to study here. Rick Perry's proposal to lower "out of state" tuition to encourage that people come get educated and STAY here is a SMART one. He also supports the military, scouting, and in fact wrote a great book called On My Honor in praise of the organization, is married to his "starter" and only wife, Anita (don't think there are any former interns or mistresses anywhere), is and has also raised an Eagle Scout son and supports ALL forms of education, including vouchers and home school programs. Now where have you seen a public official support both public and private education before?
I admire him for all of these things. Tea party patriots like myself understand that we cannot have a PERFECT candidate—he, like G.W. isn't really pursuing the border as far as I can tell, he supports toll roads, which I can't stand and there was a question on an improper execution that came up prior to this latest race—I'm guessing this is just pure politics. From what I have read, the guy was indeed guilty of murdering his family. Just another red herring for the left's usual tactic of painting conservatives as bloodthirsty, heartless killers of the innocent. As I had mentioned in one of my earlier blogs, I had watched the first republican governor's debate—Perry appeared unengaged, and like the smug "good old boy" he is portrayed to be by the liberal folks. He just didn't seem to really care about giving specifics on policy. He gave little substantive answers and just touted repeatedly how great it was to be in Texas. Debra Medina, on the other hand, who I had NEVER seen and knew nothing about, was awesome in that debate. She directly and concisely answered each question and I have already mentioned that when she said to eliminate property taxes, I becames intrigued. Our property taxes here are outrageous! Even though I LIKED Perry, I began to wonder about Medina. I searched Google but could not find any real history on her. I found no controversy, just that she was a home schooling mom, raised in Texas and carried a gun. Basically, she looked like a "Mrs. Smith" going to Washington—straight forward, direct, honest???
I missed the 2nd debate. I, to this day, haven't been able to find it on U-Tube to review. However, I understand Perry did rather well at the second debate. However, this brings me to Glenn Beck's most bizarre interview today.
I am a regular viewer of Glenn Beck's television show. I dvr it daily and if I could have the entire air-check of his television show, I would. I consider him to be the best history teacher I never had in college. MOST of his daily shows are AWESOME, a few are corny, and only rarely are they boring. He puts on a substantive show literally filled with facts, statistics, history lessons and is just an amazing broadcaster. His radio show, which I only found recently here in Austin on 98.9 has a distinctly different flavor. I don't really enjoy the two sidekicks who chime in and sometimes find the exchange between guests and him to border on "shock jock" in that he can go "off" on guests and take what people say and then rail on them without giving them a chance to complete their point of view—you know, talk radio. All hosts do this to some extent. But that opening song—I keep trying to find it! I love it. "Just Remember Who We Are, We Will Be The Key!"—Can't find it, don't know if it is a custom recording. It is awesome bumper music!
Okay, I digress—ADHD moment! Today, I was REALLY REALLY excited because Glenn Beck was going to have Debra Medina on his show—originally I thought it was going to be his TELEVISION show but it was his radio show instead. Finally, I was going to hear him ask "Why do you think Sarah Palin is supporting Governor Perry over you?" That question was never asked.
Instead, the interview with Medina barely lasted one segment. He asked her "who she was" and when she gave the 30 second commerical on "wife, mother, nurse..." as all politicians do when you ask them that question, he insulted her right off the bat and said "that wasn't what I asked you," as though she was evading the question. She was not. And so she repeated it and tried to expand more into her positions. I was immediately surprised by his confrontational nature upon beginning the interview. His tone was adversarial. They had a few more exchanges and then he stated that there were rumors swirling around that she was a 9/11 "truther" (the crazy folks who believe George Bush collapsed the twin towers and killed our fellow Americans). She said she had heard that and didn't know where it was coming from. She then went on to say that she did not know all of the evidence and that she wasn't going to take a position. After she said this, he went completely off on her, began laughing with his co-horts and essentially dismissed her off the air after going back and forth on the question. And the interview abruptly ended. Now if she is indeed a truther, I get it! She's got a serious screw loose, a hidden agenda—game over.
Here's where I believe Beck deserves criticism though. And let me be clear so everyone knows where I stand—people who believe that our former president and/or our government melted the steel on the twin towers to go to war in Iraq are CRAZY. Willie Nelson (Austin's favorite son) is crazy! I went to a concert at The Backyard because he is an Austin institution and I had to tell my friend that it was against my better judgment to go because of how I feel about his hatred of America. If Debra Medina is a truther, she's not getting my vote, now or ever. BUT, after Beck essentially "hung up" on her, he said this. "I never liked her anyway." This bothered me very much. He did not extend to Medina a chance to express her views so we, the audience could make the call, in exactly the same way that Sarah Palin was ambushed and made to look stupid by Katie Couric and Charlie Gibson.
I'm taking Ms. Medina at face value here. If indeed, she is a "grass roots" politician, then I can imagine how intimidating it would be to talk to someone like Glenn Beck—I would be intimidated and I agree with him. If he treated me that way because I was so nervous, I said something stupid or inarticulate, it would be like a punch in the stomach to have him treat me that way and dismiss me in just the first few sentences of an interview. I would feel betrayed, blindsided and flustered. He said he didn't like her because she said she was "just like him, a grass roots organizer..." and he dismissed her as someone who didn't have a clue who he was. In essence, Glenn Beck, the one who always seems to be on the side of the people, wrote off this person before she could make any other points, clarify why she couldn't emphatically say "the truther's are crazy" and instead, just cut her off and ended the interview. I suspect he muted her so she couldn't hear what they were saying before he calmly said "nice to talk with you" and then let her go.
I don't find Glenn Beck to be a rude or insensitive person. When a legitimately infuriating guest calls his radio show, he gives them a lot of rope before going off. But this appeared completely pre-meditated today. I saw him at The Alamo last year. He seemed very down to earth at the first tea party. People at his book signings have said "he is who he claims to be" when they shake his hand and have a few words with him. I have read all of his books and they are BRILLIANT. But today, he was out of line. His only interest was in discrediting Medina. The question I am left with is this. If Rick Perry or Kay Hutchison knew that Medina was a "truther," then why wasn't this question asked at the first debate? Surely someone would want to bring this up for political advantage, wouldn't they? Rick Perry was given a moment in which he could ask Debra Medina anything. I can't remember what that question was but I know it wasn't about this. So, where did Glenn Beck find this out? Why didn't anyone else discover it until now and why didn't Sarah Palin, in supporting Rick Perry, mention it so that people who follow her on Facebook would know definitively that Debra Medina had this view? This is a HUGE political advantage to Perry and/or Hutchison.
Something just doesn't seem right. If it is indeed true, then I'm glad it was revealed today. However, if it isn't true, then Glenn Beck may have seriously influenced a Texas election with false information that could hurt this candidate. I watch Fox because the "talent" there has class and never gets in the ditch with CNN and/or MSNBC in demeaning people. Glenn demeaned Medina. I think those of us in the 2nd largest state in the nation would have preferred a "we report, you decide" approach to this interview today. I know Beck's radio show is separate from Fox, but when you are now working with Palin, who supports Perry, it makes me wonder if an agenda was put forth to help Rick Perry remain the frontrunner—and the reason I can't believe I'm saying this is because I SUPPORT Rick Perry! But I want a fair and balanced presentation of all candidates so I can be sure I am making an informed decision.
Glenn, I still love you but you owe Ms. Medina and all of us listening today in anticipation of a great Beck interview, an apology. Yes, we hold you to a high standard. At 23 million a year, you are in a position of tremendous influence and even I couldn't defend you today against all of my "friends" (I use that term VERY loosely) on the left who want to pummel you. I have to say, for the first time, I wanted to pummel you too! Okay, back to making dinner for the brood! And dad? If you're feeling sick from the chemo, maybe reading the above will make you mad enough to forget the nausea.
I had written to both Sarah Palin's facebook and on my blog in earlier posts last week asking why Sarah Palin was not supporting Medina (who was said to be an 'independent minded" "Scott Brown" "tea party" type of candidate.) It was a sincere question—it was not posed because I am a supporter of Medina. I, as a new Texas voter in this primary, am eagerly trying to discern WHO would be the best choice for Texas going forward. I have ruled out Hutchison because I can SEE she is "big" Washington government and I don't want anyone tainted by an association there in the past 10-12 years bringing their big spending to Texas. I heard 10 minutes of the democrat governor's debate and after they refused to answer "yes or no" to vouchers, I became so infuriated at the double speak, I turned the debate off—more spending, more money into the failing schools. The democrats are done. I already LIKE Rick Perry. In fact, if I was "not" engaged in seeking out more info, I would vote for him without even looking into Medina. Why? Because I am a Nuevo Texan.
Rick Perry's governorship of this state is precisely why people like me are fleeing California for the lone star state. We moved her just 3 years ago. In many ways, I find that my husband and I appreciate living here and see the wonderful differences in Texas culture so clearly because of what we saw happen to our state. Rick Perry has been governor for the past 10 years, since George W. Bush (another VERY popular governor) ran this state. Austin, Texas is simply a GREAT place to live. There are no potholes in the streets. There is no litter. Wonderful zoning rules keep restaurants and businesses next to the highways, where you can easily see (and frequent) them and puts the homes in the beautiful hillsides of Austin. The air is clean and beautiful here. We have 5 world class universities and colleges within driving distance of the capitol. There are oak trees for miles, longhorns, farms, wineries, antique stores, parks, lakes and trails galore. Connected to all of this natural beauty is the city—yes, a growing city, with the local hippies resisting the new high-rise condos and the poor folks east of the 35 highway, where a regentrification is under way posting cardboard signs that read "rich yuppies' moving here. Here, we have the usual problems with saving some form of wildlife (like a blind salamander) so the roads don't go through to accommodate the growth—thereby releasing exhaust fumes into the "clean" air instead—as motorists and families bringing more business to all of these hippies and tree huggers protest. You know—they want to live here but they don't want YOU to live here. Texas is a LOT like California in this regard and that is NOT a good thing.
However, with a fiercely independent streak and a desire to be responsible in growth, both sides seem to be working together (most of the time) to keep Texas from turning into California while welcoming the growth that is bringing jobs, an entrepreneurial spirit and college students from all over the country to study here. Rick Perry's proposal to lower "out of state" tuition to encourage that people come get educated and STAY here is a SMART one. He also supports the military, scouting, and in fact wrote a great book called On My Honor in praise of the organization, is married to his "starter" and only wife, Anita (don't think there are any former interns or mistresses anywhere), is and has also raised an Eagle Scout son and supports ALL forms of education, including vouchers and home school programs. Now where have you seen a public official support both public and private education before?
I admire him for all of these things. Tea party patriots like myself understand that we cannot have a PERFECT candidate—he, like G.W. isn't really pursuing the border as far as I can tell, he supports toll roads, which I can't stand and there was a question on an improper execution that came up prior to this latest race—I'm guessing this is just pure politics. From what I have read, the guy was indeed guilty of murdering his family. Just another red herring for the left's usual tactic of painting conservatives as bloodthirsty, heartless killers of the innocent. As I had mentioned in one of my earlier blogs, I had watched the first republican governor's debate—Perry appeared unengaged, and like the smug "good old boy" he is portrayed to be by the liberal folks. He just didn't seem to really care about giving specifics on policy. He gave little substantive answers and just touted repeatedly how great it was to be in Texas. Debra Medina, on the other hand, who I had NEVER seen and knew nothing about, was awesome in that debate. She directly and concisely answered each question and I have already mentioned that when she said to eliminate property taxes, I becames intrigued. Our property taxes here are outrageous! Even though I LIKED Perry, I began to wonder about Medina. I searched Google but could not find any real history on her. I found no controversy, just that she was a home schooling mom, raised in Texas and carried a gun. Basically, she looked like a "Mrs. Smith" going to Washington—straight forward, direct, honest???
I missed the 2nd debate. I, to this day, haven't been able to find it on U-Tube to review. However, I understand Perry did rather well at the second debate. However, this brings me to Glenn Beck's most bizarre interview today.
I am a regular viewer of Glenn Beck's television show. I dvr it daily and if I could have the entire air-check of his television show, I would. I consider him to be the best history teacher I never had in college. MOST of his daily shows are AWESOME, a few are corny, and only rarely are they boring. He puts on a substantive show literally filled with facts, statistics, history lessons and is just an amazing broadcaster. His radio show, which I only found recently here in Austin on 98.9 has a distinctly different flavor. I don't really enjoy the two sidekicks who chime in and sometimes find the exchange between guests and him to border on "shock jock" in that he can go "off" on guests and take what people say and then rail on them without giving them a chance to complete their point of view—you know, talk radio. All hosts do this to some extent. But that opening song—I keep trying to find it! I love it. "Just Remember Who We Are, We Will Be The Key!"—Can't find it, don't know if it is a custom recording. It is awesome bumper music!
Okay, I digress—ADHD moment! Today, I was REALLY REALLY excited because Glenn Beck was going to have Debra Medina on his show—originally I thought it was going to be his TELEVISION show but it was his radio show instead. Finally, I was going to hear him ask "Why do you think Sarah Palin is supporting Governor Perry over you?" That question was never asked.
Instead, the interview with Medina barely lasted one segment. He asked her "who she was" and when she gave the 30 second commerical on "wife, mother, nurse..." as all politicians do when you ask them that question, he insulted her right off the bat and said "that wasn't what I asked you," as though she was evading the question. She was not. And so she repeated it and tried to expand more into her positions. I was immediately surprised by his confrontational nature upon beginning the interview. His tone was adversarial. They had a few more exchanges and then he stated that there were rumors swirling around that she was a 9/11 "truther" (the crazy folks who believe George Bush collapsed the twin towers and killed our fellow Americans). She said she had heard that and didn't know where it was coming from. She then went on to say that she did not know all of the evidence and that she wasn't going to take a position. After she said this, he went completely off on her, began laughing with his co-horts and essentially dismissed her off the air after going back and forth on the question. And the interview abruptly ended. Now if she is indeed a truther, I get it! She's got a serious screw loose, a hidden agenda—game over.
Here's where I believe Beck deserves criticism though. And let me be clear so everyone knows where I stand—people who believe that our former president and/or our government melted the steel on the twin towers to go to war in Iraq are CRAZY. Willie Nelson (Austin's favorite son) is crazy! I went to a concert at The Backyard because he is an Austin institution and I had to tell my friend that it was against my better judgment to go because of how I feel about his hatred of America. If Debra Medina is a truther, she's not getting my vote, now or ever. BUT, after Beck essentially "hung up" on her, he said this. "I never liked her anyway." This bothered me very much. He did not extend to Medina a chance to express her views so we, the audience could make the call, in exactly the same way that Sarah Palin was ambushed and made to look stupid by Katie Couric and Charlie Gibson.
I'm taking Ms. Medina at face value here. If indeed, she is a "grass roots" politician, then I can imagine how intimidating it would be to talk to someone like Glenn Beck—I would be intimidated and I agree with him. If he treated me that way because I was so nervous, I said something stupid or inarticulate, it would be like a punch in the stomach to have him treat me that way and dismiss me in just the first few sentences of an interview. I would feel betrayed, blindsided and flustered. He said he didn't like her because she said she was "just like him, a grass roots organizer..." and he dismissed her as someone who didn't have a clue who he was. In essence, Glenn Beck, the one who always seems to be on the side of the people, wrote off this person before she could make any other points, clarify why she couldn't emphatically say "the truther's are crazy" and instead, just cut her off and ended the interview. I suspect he muted her so she couldn't hear what they were saying before he calmly said "nice to talk with you" and then let her go.
I don't find Glenn Beck to be a rude or insensitive person. When a legitimately infuriating guest calls his radio show, he gives them a lot of rope before going off. But this appeared completely pre-meditated today. I saw him at The Alamo last year. He seemed very down to earth at the first tea party. People at his book signings have said "he is who he claims to be" when they shake his hand and have a few words with him. I have read all of his books and they are BRILLIANT. But today, he was out of line. His only interest was in discrediting Medina. The question I am left with is this. If Rick Perry or Kay Hutchison knew that Medina was a "truther," then why wasn't this question asked at the first debate? Surely someone would want to bring this up for political advantage, wouldn't they? Rick Perry was given a moment in which he could ask Debra Medina anything. I can't remember what that question was but I know it wasn't about this. So, where did Glenn Beck find this out? Why didn't anyone else discover it until now and why didn't Sarah Palin, in supporting Rick Perry, mention it so that people who follow her on Facebook would know definitively that Debra Medina had this view? This is a HUGE political advantage to Perry and/or Hutchison.
Something just doesn't seem right. If it is indeed true, then I'm glad it was revealed today. However, if it isn't true, then Glenn Beck may have seriously influenced a Texas election with false information that could hurt this candidate. I watch Fox because the "talent" there has class and never gets in the ditch with CNN and/or MSNBC in demeaning people. Glenn demeaned Medina. I think those of us in the 2nd largest state in the nation would have preferred a "we report, you decide" approach to this interview today. I know Beck's radio show is separate from Fox, but when you are now working with Palin, who supports Perry, it makes me wonder if an agenda was put forth to help Rick Perry remain the frontrunner—and the reason I can't believe I'm saying this is because I SUPPORT Rick Perry! But I want a fair and balanced presentation of all candidates so I can be sure I am making an informed decision.
Glenn, I still love you but you owe Ms. Medina and all of us listening today in anticipation of a great Beck interview, an apology. Yes, we hold you to a high standard. At 23 million a year, you are in a position of tremendous influence and even I couldn't defend you today against all of my "friends" (I use that term VERY loosely) on the left who want to pummel you. I have to say, for the first time, I wanted to pummel you too! Okay, back to making dinner for the brood! And dad? If you're feeling sick from the chemo, maybe reading the above will make you mad enough to forget the nausea.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Talk to the Hand MSNBC and NOW!
In my previous blog, I cited things I thought the left wing media might attack in Palin's tea party speech over the weekend. But I never noticed, nor would have cared if she (or any other public speaker) had written notes on their hand. Ridiculous. Upon seeing the trouble MSNBC went to once again to discredit her as "stupid," I hope the next time she speaks, she writes something more interesting on her hand and holds it nice and still for the MSNBC cameras to capture.
SNL, Stewart, Leno and Letterman will have great comedy material to produce related to this latest Palinism. Someday, I'll have to make a list of all of the attacks on Sarah Palin and compare them to the attacks on other political candidates. Never before has anyone so freaked out the left that they will stop at nothing to insult her.
In another irony of the elitist intelligence gap, remember that "controversial" and highly contested planned super bowl ad featuring Tim Tebow and his mom, sponsored by Focus on the Family? My facebook pages contained words that changed "Focus" to something quite different. There was outrage, condemnation, hatred and petitions against CBS. After all this, if you blinked, you might have missed the spot. There was no mention of pro-life. No mention of abortion. But now, the National Organization for Women is outraged that it portrays violence towards women because Tim tackles mom in. Really?
Did anyone see the multitude of ads with Betty White getting knocked down by football players—she is old AND a woman? Did anyone see the "slap" commercials, the men without pants commercials, heck even a longhorn running along the cattle commercial? I mean PETA should be outraged. Oh, and there were midgets (not one but TWO commercials), er, I mean "vertically challenged" people ads.
Thank goodness The Saints won. It was nice to see the underdog hero win. America needs more of THAT and less of the above.
SNL, Stewart, Leno and Letterman will have great comedy material to produce related to this latest Palinism. Someday, I'll have to make a list of all of the attacks on Sarah Palin and compare them to the attacks on other political candidates. Never before has anyone so freaked out the left that they will stop at nothing to insult her.
In another irony of the elitist intelligence gap, remember that "controversial" and highly contested planned super bowl ad featuring Tim Tebow and his mom, sponsored by Focus on the Family? My facebook pages contained words that changed "Focus" to something quite different. There was outrage, condemnation, hatred and petitions against CBS. After all this, if you blinked, you might have missed the spot. There was no mention of pro-life. No mention of abortion. But now, the National Organization for Women is outraged that it portrays violence towards women because Tim tackles mom in. Really?
Did anyone see the multitude of ads with Betty White getting knocked down by football players—she is old AND a woman? Did anyone see the "slap" commercials, the men without pants commercials, heck even a longhorn running along the cattle commercial? I mean PETA should be outraged. Oh, and there were midgets (not one but TWO commercials), er, I mean "vertically challenged" people ads.
Thank goodness The Saints won. It was nice to see the underdog hero win. America needs more of THAT and less of the above.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Palin's Practically Perfect (Tea) Party Presentation
If anyone doubts the power of the tea party movement, they didn't really listen to Sarah Palin's carefully crafted speech last night. I watched it twice before writing this post.
Last night, I watched nervously, hoping she wouldn't mispronounce a word, be grammatically incorrect, or lose her place on the typed pages on the podium. In recent weeks, after watching her utter the word "uncomfortableness" on O'Reilly and hearing her use the words "common sense conservative solutions" repeatedly, I began to wonder if in fact, her vocabulary was too limited for prime time, even though I am in alignment with most of her principles and agree wholeheartedly with what she stands for.
I must note here that CNN may have not intentionally planned to show Sarah Palin in a positive light, but this time, they did not make the mistake of pretending that the tea party movement was "unimportant" or "irrelevant." They actually provided more fair and balanced coverage than Fox. Geraldo Rivera never stopped talking over the introduction that Andrew Breitbart gave prior to her speech. I would have liked to have heard that. Even the camera angles and color saturation on Fox were not as good as on CNN. So bravo to CNN for their excellent camera work and for getting out of the way so Palin could be heard.
I also appreciated CNN's pre-speech coverage. Unfortunately, no matter how hard the anchor tried to minimize the tea partiers as "socialist" calling radicals, those on both sides of his split screen shut down the spin with facts. It was refreshing to see. MSNBC was too busy airing their latest tabloid "lock up" show and of course, ignored the speech completely. But I'm sure their famous trio is busy pulling out any sound bytes that will make Palin look inarticulate, like a religious freak or an uneducated bimbo. She did use the word "distrust" instead of "mistrust" so look for that to be run again and again and again on Monday evening. Let me think like an MSNBC producer—they'll likely air the "blowing the kiss" to the serviceman in the audience, and they'll likely show her "tear up" when she commended the audience for their work and mentioned special needs children, and for good measure, they'll probably laugh off the audience standing up when, predictably, the host mentions "President Palin." Oh, and I can't forget when she asks "how's that hopey, changey stuff working out for ya now?" Of course, they'll say that she can't even pronounce hope and change, failing to see that the "yolk's" on them. But let's see what happens tomorrow on the cable news outlets—my favorite sport to watch.
Today, before writing, I decided to watch the speech again with my 12 year old son. He didn't make it through the whole thing; his DSI was getting cold. BUT he did make one very astute observation. "Mom," he said. "She sounds like your neighbor, like someone you can trust. She doesn't talk down to people." I love that children find it so easy to spot genuine when so many jaded adults, with their preconceived ideas of what a "leader" should be, fail to understand that the reason Palin resonates with so many is expressly because she does not TRY to dazzle us with her brilliance. She is an action oriented, simple talking, morally consistent, idea driven, accidental hero to the millions of heretofore silent Americans who have watched for years as our country has been taken over by wolves in sheep's clothing on both sides of the aisle.
When the far left uses the ridiculous rhetoric to malign the entire tea party movement as "Obama" haters, questioning "where were these people when George W. Bush was in office?" what they fail to understand is that we were already losing faith in our government during that time, but what put us over the edge was when this president spent more in his first month in office than all other presidents in U.S. History COMBINED.
We began bubbling over when our president said "no" lobbyists and then hired them, when he promised complete transparency, and when we saw Barney Frank on tape say nothing was wrong with Fannie and Freddie. Probably nothing was worse then watching Timothy Geitner, who didn't pay his own taxes, be touted as the BEST qualified person in America to become our Secretary of the Treasury. This man can throw me in jail if I don't pay my taxes but he's in charge of the entire U.S. Treasury! It's an outrage. If that isn't enough to take an already frustrated electorate a reason to simultaneous shout "someone's going to need to throw a tea party," then the far left will never be able to handle the truth. I said those very words in my own living room last February and attended the first tea party on April 15, 2009. What a difference a year can make! I don't expect that in 2010, Newsweek and Life will be able to ignore the mass crowds that are sure to march on Washington as real hope and change greets our "let them eat cake" congress.
Palin's speech began with a Happy Birthday to President Reagan. It was quintessential Palin throughout a 45 minute or so appeal to the movement to stay focussed on objectives. I wish I could be Palin's speech writer. I feel that she gave an overall good speech but that it repeated many of the buzz phrases and talking points we have already heard. I was hoping she would get more specific about strategy. However, the three greatest moments in her speech (in my opinion), were when she said "we need a Commander in Chief not a professor of law at the lecturn, " when she said emphatically that the tea party movement did NOT need a leader because it was from the people, and when she smartly said that the GOP would be WISE to absorb the tea party—instead of saying that the tea party should absorb the GOP.
I was impressed by this because I feel that Palin is now (by circumstance) too famous to be the default leader of this grass roots movement and would diminish the "we the people" every day American foundation that the tea party springs from. Her acknowledgement of this as well, certainly cemented my belief that she is authentic, says what she means and means what she says. Finally, she clarified that the tea party is not an extension of the Republican party but, is in fact, going to have a huge influence over who win elections, regardless of party. That needed to be stated. We tea partiers have a good memory and we know which republicans came out right away for the tea partiers and which ones maligned both Palin and the movement for a good part of 2009.
I'm looking foward to seeing how this all plays out. I really believe Rush Limbaugh is wrong when he says that we tea partiers are "splitting the party" which will fail like the Ross Perot split election did years ago unless we join "them." What I feel in the air is that the Republicans are going to be forced to revert to the true conservative principles they USED to have or face strong opposition from a non-partisan tea party that will continue to endorse new candidates and vote the status quo out—no matter what that little letter indicates next to their name.
During the opening of Palin's speech last night, I was so nervous for her, not wanting her to fail. But when I watched it again today, I had the ability (knowing how it all turned out) to fully appreciate her speech. It was not as smooth and polished as her fiery convention speech. She stumbled a bit and probably stalled a bit at the beginning with a little too much "I'm proud to be an American." It's hard not to be nervous when every single thing you say is apt to be used against you. She has managed, for the most part, to stay on message. She went so far as to say that she will be supporting third party candidates and some others in hotly contested primaries.
We all know that she is going to tour with John McCain. While I do not support that, I can understand why she is going to do so. In her book, Going Rogue, Palin NEVER says a harsh word about John McCain. He, during the vitriol expoused by the media, never blasted the media BUT he also never maligned her. I believe that Palin is a bit like George W. Bush in this way. She turns the other cheek and gives the benefit of the doubt to those who don't give her an overt reason to believe that they are her enemy. And though, John McCain, passively threw her under the bus by omission, he has never publically demeaned her in any way. And so, I believe she will support him out of friendship and probably because, were it not for him, she would not find herself in this position of power today. However, in light of his comments on Don't Ask, Don't Tell, I think she would be wise to withdraw her support. McCain is just so inconsistent and, other than being a true American hero, I don't feel he is sincere in much of what he says and does.
As I said earlier, she is supporting Governor Perry instead of the more independent Debra Medina, whom I think is probably a Scott Brown kind of candidate. I think it is a fair question to ask Palin "why" is she not throwing her support toward the "renegade" and "rogue" candidate. However, knowing what I know about Perry after researching him a bit and how WELL Texas is indeed running as I celebrate 3 years of living here, it makes pretty good sense that Palin is supporting him. She did govern Alaska through principle centered decisions over ideology. She does profess to support great ideas (even if on balance, not ALL of the ideas are "perfect") and clearly says that we can't agree with EVERY decision candidates make. I agree with her position that faith needs to be placed on ideas above the people who serve, as they are fallible. Still, the question of not supporting Medina is one I would like answered.
Palin emerged last night as the powerful communicator we have seen before. She, of course, publically stated that her $100,000 fee goes straight to the Tea Party PAC. Now, if Fox News will just let her be the analyst they hired her for instead of repeating campaign interviews, Palin might be successful there as well! Looking forward to seeing what the pundits think on Monday!
Last night, I watched nervously, hoping she wouldn't mispronounce a word, be grammatically incorrect, or lose her place on the typed pages on the podium. In recent weeks, after watching her utter the word "uncomfortableness" on O'Reilly and hearing her use the words "common sense conservative solutions" repeatedly, I began to wonder if in fact, her vocabulary was too limited for prime time, even though I am in alignment with most of her principles and agree wholeheartedly with what she stands for.
I must note here that CNN may have not intentionally planned to show Sarah Palin in a positive light, but this time, they did not make the mistake of pretending that the tea party movement was "unimportant" or "irrelevant." They actually provided more fair and balanced coverage than Fox. Geraldo Rivera never stopped talking over the introduction that Andrew Breitbart gave prior to her speech. I would have liked to have heard that. Even the camera angles and color saturation on Fox were not as good as on CNN. So bravo to CNN for their excellent camera work and for getting out of the way so Palin could be heard.
I also appreciated CNN's pre-speech coverage. Unfortunately, no matter how hard the anchor tried to minimize the tea partiers as "socialist" calling radicals, those on both sides of his split screen shut down the spin with facts. It was refreshing to see. MSNBC was too busy airing their latest tabloid "lock up" show and of course, ignored the speech completely. But I'm sure their famous trio is busy pulling out any sound bytes that will make Palin look inarticulate, like a religious freak or an uneducated bimbo. She did use the word "distrust" instead of "mistrust" so look for that to be run again and again and again on Monday evening. Let me think like an MSNBC producer—they'll likely air the "blowing the kiss" to the serviceman in the audience, and they'll likely show her "tear up" when she commended the audience for their work and mentioned special needs children, and for good measure, they'll probably laugh off the audience standing up when, predictably, the host mentions "President Palin." Oh, and I can't forget when she asks "how's that hopey, changey stuff working out for ya now?" Of course, they'll say that she can't even pronounce hope and change, failing to see that the "yolk's" on them. But let's see what happens tomorrow on the cable news outlets—my favorite sport to watch.
Today, before writing, I decided to watch the speech again with my 12 year old son. He didn't make it through the whole thing; his DSI was getting cold. BUT he did make one very astute observation. "Mom," he said. "She sounds like your neighbor, like someone you can trust. She doesn't talk down to people." I love that children find it so easy to spot genuine when so many jaded adults, with their preconceived ideas of what a "leader" should be, fail to understand that the reason Palin resonates with so many is expressly because she does not TRY to dazzle us with her brilliance. She is an action oriented, simple talking, morally consistent, idea driven, accidental hero to the millions of heretofore silent Americans who have watched for years as our country has been taken over by wolves in sheep's clothing on both sides of the aisle.
When the far left uses the ridiculous rhetoric to malign the entire tea party movement as "Obama" haters, questioning "where were these people when George W. Bush was in office?" what they fail to understand is that we were already losing faith in our government during that time, but what put us over the edge was when this president spent more in his first month in office than all other presidents in U.S. History COMBINED.
We began bubbling over when our president said "no" lobbyists and then hired them, when he promised complete transparency, and when we saw Barney Frank on tape say nothing was wrong with Fannie and Freddie. Probably nothing was worse then watching Timothy Geitner, who didn't pay his own taxes, be touted as the BEST qualified person in America to become our Secretary of the Treasury. This man can throw me in jail if I don't pay my taxes but he's in charge of the entire U.S. Treasury! It's an outrage. If that isn't enough to take an already frustrated electorate a reason to simultaneous shout "someone's going to need to throw a tea party," then the far left will never be able to handle the truth. I said those very words in my own living room last February and attended the first tea party on April 15, 2009. What a difference a year can make! I don't expect that in 2010, Newsweek and Life will be able to ignore the mass crowds that are sure to march on Washington as real hope and change greets our "let them eat cake" congress.
Palin's speech began with a Happy Birthday to President Reagan. It was quintessential Palin throughout a 45 minute or so appeal to the movement to stay focussed on objectives. I wish I could be Palin's speech writer. I feel that she gave an overall good speech but that it repeated many of the buzz phrases and talking points we have already heard. I was hoping she would get more specific about strategy. However, the three greatest moments in her speech (in my opinion), were when she said "we need a Commander in Chief not a professor of law at the lecturn, " when she said emphatically that the tea party movement did NOT need a leader because it was from the people, and when she smartly said that the GOP would be WISE to absorb the tea party—instead of saying that the tea party should absorb the GOP.
I was impressed by this because I feel that Palin is now (by circumstance) too famous to be the default leader of this grass roots movement and would diminish the "we the people" every day American foundation that the tea party springs from. Her acknowledgement of this as well, certainly cemented my belief that she is authentic, says what she means and means what she says. Finally, she clarified that the tea party is not an extension of the Republican party but, is in fact, going to have a huge influence over who win elections, regardless of party. That needed to be stated. We tea partiers have a good memory and we know which republicans came out right away for the tea partiers and which ones maligned both Palin and the movement for a good part of 2009.
I'm looking foward to seeing how this all plays out. I really believe Rush Limbaugh is wrong when he says that we tea partiers are "splitting the party" which will fail like the Ross Perot split election did years ago unless we join "them." What I feel in the air is that the Republicans are going to be forced to revert to the true conservative principles they USED to have or face strong opposition from a non-partisan tea party that will continue to endorse new candidates and vote the status quo out—no matter what that little letter indicates next to their name.
During the opening of Palin's speech last night, I was so nervous for her, not wanting her to fail. But when I watched it again today, I had the ability (knowing how it all turned out) to fully appreciate her speech. It was not as smooth and polished as her fiery convention speech. She stumbled a bit and probably stalled a bit at the beginning with a little too much "I'm proud to be an American." It's hard not to be nervous when every single thing you say is apt to be used against you. She has managed, for the most part, to stay on message. She went so far as to say that she will be supporting third party candidates and some others in hotly contested primaries.
We all know that she is going to tour with John McCain. While I do not support that, I can understand why she is going to do so. In her book, Going Rogue, Palin NEVER says a harsh word about John McCain. He, during the vitriol expoused by the media, never blasted the media BUT he also never maligned her. I believe that Palin is a bit like George W. Bush in this way. She turns the other cheek and gives the benefit of the doubt to those who don't give her an overt reason to believe that they are her enemy. And though, John McCain, passively threw her under the bus by omission, he has never publically demeaned her in any way. And so, I believe she will support him out of friendship and probably because, were it not for him, she would not find herself in this position of power today. However, in light of his comments on Don't Ask, Don't Tell, I think she would be wise to withdraw her support. McCain is just so inconsistent and, other than being a true American hero, I don't feel he is sincere in much of what he says and does.
As I said earlier, she is supporting Governor Perry instead of the more independent Debra Medina, whom I think is probably a Scott Brown kind of candidate. I think it is a fair question to ask Palin "why" is she not throwing her support toward the "renegade" and "rogue" candidate. However, knowing what I know about Perry after researching him a bit and how WELL Texas is indeed running as I celebrate 3 years of living here, it makes pretty good sense that Palin is supporting him. She did govern Alaska through principle centered decisions over ideology. She does profess to support great ideas (even if on balance, not ALL of the ideas are "perfect") and clearly says that we can't agree with EVERY decision candidates make. I agree with her position that faith needs to be placed on ideas above the people who serve, as they are fallible. Still, the question of not supporting Medina is one I would like answered.
Palin emerged last night as the powerful communicator we have seen before. She, of course, publically stated that her $100,000 fee goes straight to the Tea Party PAC. Now, if Fox News will just let her be the analyst they hired her for instead of repeating campaign interviews, Palin might be successful there as well! Looking forward to seeing what the pundits think on Monday!
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Where in the world is Sarah Palin?
It is well known that Sarah Palin became a commentator on Fox News in January 2010. I was initially excited and thought it was a really shrewd move for Palin. I am not sure this was a good idea now for either Palin or Fox.
I need to back up a bit so what I write about Palin from here on out will be comprehended by those who can't see straight when they even hear the words "Sarah Palin." I, like every other American, had never heard of Sarah Palin before she was announced as John McCain's running mate in the last election. My first reaction was "oh great, he played the gender card." I'm so tired of politicians thinking that I as a woman vote because of someone's gender, color or wardrobe choice. I had originally wanted Mitt Romney to be the Republican candidate for president so I was HOPING that McCain would choose him. Then, I could at least vote for half the ticket instead of for the lesser of two evils.
I thought Obama would smartly pick Hillary Clinton—which would have been a slam dunk for the progressives. But Obama's ego is so huge, he chose the very demographic the left has contempt for—the bumbling, middle-aged, non threatening, white, career politician—Joe Biden and offered Hillary Secretary of State so she couldn't run against him later—unless of course, she quit. Can't wait to see what happens in 2012. Talk about the antithesis of "change." Because Obama left the door open for a game change (no reference to the book), McCain picked a complete unknown which eventually catapulted an unsuspecting Palin into the stratosphere. The rest is history.
With no opinion on Palin to begin with, I watched the entire process from beginning to end. Once she spoke at the convention, she became my candidate of choice—McCain was just the other guy on the ticket. I wanted her in the White House and, well, if McCain was there too, well then that would be okay. My vote was going to be FOR Palin. The more the media and the left eviscerated her and the more real and direct she was in responding to the vitriol, the more I was impressed. She was nonplussed and unflappable during the entire campaign.
In June 2009, I was driving from Texas to California with my father when she came on the radio and announced her resignation as governor. We both listened to the speech live. She never uses a teleprompter. The woman speaks from the heart. I was not disappointed, nor fazed by her decision. It made perfect sense to me that she would act in the people's best interests and save Alaska from the outrageous costs associated with the overwhelming amount of frivolous lawsuits and investigations aimed at discrediting her, her family, and bankrupting her, her family and making it impossible for her to get back to the business of governing.
One only need to see this woman making moose stew with young children circulating around her in the kitchen while talking to Greta Van Susteren to GET how real, competent, bright, capable and smart Sarah Palin was. Refreshing doesn't even begin to describe how those of us who "get" Sarah Palin feel about her.
I do not hold Sarah Palin's religious views, was disheartened to learn that her teenage daughter was pregnant, and disappointed that she didn't assert herself on both the now infamous Katie Couric and Charles Gibson interviews. HOWEVER, in every other interview and/or rally, and any other place where a camera was stuck in her face, she was consistent, direct, honest, up front, gracious, articulate and her record popularity in Alaska (which I studied) preceded ALL of the ensuing controversy—meaning that she was doing great things while no one was looking. For that, I admire her. I bought her book, Going Rogue, the day it came out (bought one for dad, another one for a military hero and have mine on loan to a neighbor at present time) and read it within a few days. Funny when you read something "new" while the media is "reviewing" the book. The views on MSNBC were unbelievable—a whiner! For the record, Sarah Palin does not whine. Chris Matthews whines. Rachel Maddow scowls. Keith Olbermann condescends.
Palin addressed EVERY single issue during the campaign and then some in this well written, thorough book. And Sarah Palin is NO victim. She is a triple threat—a married, in love, mother of 5, one with special needs, and one who is an American hero. She is a competitive athlete and feminine at the same time. She is over 40. She wears glasses and makes them look sexy. She looks just as beautiful in a yellow fishing suit as she does in a business suit. She speaks with a midwestern accent, leaves "gs' off of "ing" words and occasionally says "crap" on TV. Bring it on. We need more of that and less of the "dazzle you with my big word "bull--it" the politicians spew as truth from their bullypulpits. The truth is that "thinking" Americans don't believe any of it anymore.
All this being said, after reading, seeing, watching all of the far left continue to tear her apart limb by limb long after she resigned LAST June, it was an exciting announcement to hear she would join the Fox News team. I thought that this was an excellent move—at first!
The first interview with Bill O'Reilly was okay at best. However, I immediately noticed that she did not seem to have the same "fire within her belly" during that interview that she had as a candidate. The next interview was with Glenn Beck. This highly anticipated "first meeting" was held in a sterile room "Barbara Walters" style in front of the Statue of Liberty.
Beck was original in that he finally asked her some questions that were NEW but I would have loved to see her on his set at the table with an energetic exchange between both. It was silent and almost sterile, and a bit awkward. Beck is best at the blackboard. I, and so many Americans, I'm sure, are also so tired of the questions about her intelligence, Levi Johnson and discerning whether she reads or not. Beck did a great job in asking some new questions. The best moment was in her revelation that she was studying up on the details of the Statue of Liberty, expecting to be asked about that. Thank you NBC for ensuring that only the most important questions are asked of a candidate so they have a "phone-a-friend" available during an interview. But, again, I didn't find Palin to be as relaxed and engaging as she was when repeatedly interviewed during the election process. Since then, she has virtually disappeared from Fox.
I have been eagerly awaiting seeing her featured in the segments that regularly include Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove, Monica Crowley and the like. But no Sarah. The last time I saw her was during the State of the Union on a split screen. Unlike the distinguished bluescreen backgrounds featuring other Fox remote broadcasters, it looked like she was commenting from a poorly lit office of her home. Even her makeup and hair from the famous in studio Fox makeup/hair folks haven't had her looking as coiffed as Megyn Kelly, Gretchen Carlson and Kimberly Guillfoyle. I am left wondering whether Fox regrets hiring her and also if Palin regrets being hired.
Former presidential candidate, Mike Huckabee, has managed to create a successful show on Fox during the past year or two. I remember that his first show was awkward as well. It took a few times for him to hit his stride. It remains to be seen if Palin or Fox is really certain of where they are headed in this venture—remember, OTHERS are saying she wants to run for president in 2010—she has never said that and she also admitted freely in her book that stepping down as governor might be the nail in the coffin for a future run for any major political office. Sarah Palin is at her best when she is speaking on an issue that she is passionate about. Where she falls short is in the expanded use of her vocabulary. She uses the phrase "common sense solutions" far too much. This redundancy doesn't serve her well. Unfortunately, the use of the word "uncomfortableness" during the O'Reilly interview made even me cringe—if she had just laughed about it and said "was that a word?" THAT would have been quintessential Palin and disarmed her critics, but she is seeming quite stiff these days, almost afraid to show any of her human side. It is unfortunate but I understand the road she has had to travel.
But if you're going to run with the big dogs on Fox, you've got to be able to present well, vary your vocabulary and hit a home run. Otherwise, you're going to be a very easy target for Olbermann and Matthews. Not that anyone is watching them of course, but why give them any material?
I am now left wondering if Sarah Palin will suddenly disappear from Fox. If she "quits," it will be a very bad thing for her going forward. If she is fired from Fox, it will be worse. For now, I remain hopeful but am sadly disappointed in her broadcasts to date. I still believe in what she stands for and that she is an excellent representative for the average American family. I believe she shows tremendous integrity in governing. I just don't know if she is cut out to be a pundit. If these first few broadcasts don't give way to something more substantive, meaty and powerful, she may fade back into the landscape once again. That would be most unfortunate. Perhaps her keynote speech at the upcoming Tea Party Convention will once again remind people of her ability to lead, connect and inspire.
I need to back up a bit so what I write about Palin from here on out will be comprehended by those who can't see straight when they even hear the words "Sarah Palin." I, like every other American, had never heard of Sarah Palin before she was announced as John McCain's running mate in the last election. My first reaction was "oh great, he played the gender card." I'm so tired of politicians thinking that I as a woman vote because of someone's gender, color or wardrobe choice. I had originally wanted Mitt Romney to be the Republican candidate for president so I was HOPING that McCain would choose him. Then, I could at least vote for half the ticket instead of for the lesser of two evils.
I thought Obama would smartly pick Hillary Clinton—which would have been a slam dunk for the progressives. But Obama's ego is so huge, he chose the very demographic the left has contempt for—the bumbling, middle-aged, non threatening, white, career politician—Joe Biden and offered Hillary Secretary of State so she couldn't run against him later—unless of course, she quit. Can't wait to see what happens in 2012. Talk about the antithesis of "change." Because Obama left the door open for a game change (no reference to the book), McCain picked a complete unknown which eventually catapulted an unsuspecting Palin into the stratosphere. The rest is history.
With no opinion on Palin to begin with, I watched the entire process from beginning to end. Once she spoke at the convention, she became my candidate of choice—McCain was just the other guy on the ticket. I wanted her in the White House and, well, if McCain was there too, well then that would be okay. My vote was going to be FOR Palin. The more the media and the left eviscerated her and the more real and direct she was in responding to the vitriol, the more I was impressed. She was nonplussed and unflappable during the entire campaign.
In June 2009, I was driving from Texas to California with my father when she came on the radio and announced her resignation as governor. We both listened to the speech live. She never uses a teleprompter. The woman speaks from the heart. I was not disappointed, nor fazed by her decision. It made perfect sense to me that she would act in the people's best interests and save Alaska from the outrageous costs associated with the overwhelming amount of frivolous lawsuits and investigations aimed at discrediting her, her family, and bankrupting her, her family and making it impossible for her to get back to the business of governing.
One only need to see this woman making moose stew with young children circulating around her in the kitchen while talking to Greta Van Susteren to GET how real, competent, bright, capable and smart Sarah Palin was. Refreshing doesn't even begin to describe how those of us who "get" Sarah Palin feel about her.
I do not hold Sarah Palin's religious views, was disheartened to learn that her teenage daughter was pregnant, and disappointed that she didn't assert herself on both the now infamous Katie Couric and Charles Gibson interviews. HOWEVER, in every other interview and/or rally, and any other place where a camera was stuck in her face, she was consistent, direct, honest, up front, gracious, articulate and her record popularity in Alaska (which I studied) preceded ALL of the ensuing controversy—meaning that she was doing great things while no one was looking. For that, I admire her. I bought her book, Going Rogue, the day it came out (bought one for dad, another one for a military hero and have mine on loan to a neighbor at present time) and read it within a few days. Funny when you read something "new" while the media is "reviewing" the book. The views on MSNBC were unbelievable—a whiner! For the record, Sarah Palin does not whine. Chris Matthews whines. Rachel Maddow scowls. Keith Olbermann condescends.
Palin addressed EVERY single issue during the campaign and then some in this well written, thorough book. And Sarah Palin is NO victim. She is a triple threat—a married, in love, mother of 5, one with special needs, and one who is an American hero. She is a competitive athlete and feminine at the same time. She is over 40. She wears glasses and makes them look sexy. She looks just as beautiful in a yellow fishing suit as she does in a business suit. She speaks with a midwestern accent, leaves "gs' off of "ing" words and occasionally says "crap" on TV. Bring it on. We need more of that and less of the "dazzle you with my big word "bull--it" the politicians spew as truth from their bullypulpits. The truth is that "thinking" Americans don't believe any of it anymore.
All this being said, after reading, seeing, watching all of the far left continue to tear her apart limb by limb long after she resigned LAST June, it was an exciting announcement to hear she would join the Fox News team. I thought that this was an excellent move—at first!
The first interview with Bill O'Reilly was okay at best. However, I immediately noticed that she did not seem to have the same "fire within her belly" during that interview that she had as a candidate. The next interview was with Glenn Beck. This highly anticipated "first meeting" was held in a sterile room "Barbara Walters" style in front of the Statue of Liberty.
Beck was original in that he finally asked her some questions that were NEW but I would have loved to see her on his set at the table with an energetic exchange between both. It was silent and almost sterile, and a bit awkward. Beck is best at the blackboard. I, and so many Americans, I'm sure, are also so tired of the questions about her intelligence, Levi Johnson and discerning whether she reads or not. Beck did a great job in asking some new questions. The best moment was in her revelation that she was studying up on the details of the Statue of Liberty, expecting to be asked about that. Thank you NBC for ensuring that only the most important questions are asked of a candidate so they have a "phone-a-friend" available during an interview. But, again, I didn't find Palin to be as relaxed and engaging as she was when repeatedly interviewed during the election process. Since then, she has virtually disappeared from Fox.
I have been eagerly awaiting seeing her featured in the segments that regularly include Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove, Monica Crowley and the like. But no Sarah. The last time I saw her was during the State of the Union on a split screen. Unlike the distinguished bluescreen backgrounds featuring other Fox remote broadcasters, it looked like she was commenting from a poorly lit office of her home. Even her makeup and hair from the famous in studio Fox makeup/hair folks haven't had her looking as coiffed as Megyn Kelly, Gretchen Carlson and Kimberly Guillfoyle. I am left wondering whether Fox regrets hiring her and also if Palin regrets being hired.
Former presidential candidate, Mike Huckabee, has managed to create a successful show on Fox during the past year or two. I remember that his first show was awkward as well. It took a few times for him to hit his stride. It remains to be seen if Palin or Fox is really certain of where they are headed in this venture—remember, OTHERS are saying she wants to run for president in 2010—she has never said that and she also admitted freely in her book that stepping down as governor might be the nail in the coffin for a future run for any major political office. Sarah Palin is at her best when she is speaking on an issue that she is passionate about. Where she falls short is in the expanded use of her vocabulary. She uses the phrase "common sense solutions" far too much. This redundancy doesn't serve her well. Unfortunately, the use of the word "uncomfortableness" during the O'Reilly interview made even me cringe—if she had just laughed about it and said "was that a word?" THAT would have been quintessential Palin and disarmed her critics, but she is seeming quite stiff these days, almost afraid to show any of her human side. It is unfortunate but I understand the road she has had to travel.
But if you're going to run with the big dogs on Fox, you've got to be able to present well, vary your vocabulary and hit a home run. Otherwise, you're going to be a very easy target for Olbermann and Matthews. Not that anyone is watching them of course, but why give them any material?
I am now left wondering if Sarah Palin will suddenly disappear from Fox. If she "quits," it will be a very bad thing for her going forward. If she is fired from Fox, it will be worse. For now, I remain hopeful but am sadly disappointed in her broadcasts to date. I still believe in what she stands for and that she is an excellent representative for the average American family. I believe she shows tremendous integrity in governing. I just don't know if she is cut out to be a pundit. If these first few broadcasts don't give way to something more substantive, meaty and powerful, she may fade back into the landscape once again. That would be most unfortunate. Perhaps her keynote speech at the upcoming Tea Party Convention will once again remind people of her ability to lead, connect and inspire.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)