Todd Palin said the new book about Sarah Palin is “full of disgusting lies, innuendo, and smears.”
“This is a man who has been relentlessly stalking my family to the point of moving in right next door to us to harass us and spy on us to satisfy his creepy obsession with my wife,” Palin said in a statement. “His book is full of disgusting lies, innuendo, and smears. Even The New York Times called this book ‘dated, petty,’ and that it ‘chases caustic, unsubstantiated gossip.”
The NYT review Palin is referring to is here. The reviewer, Janet Maslin, doesn’t come off like a fan of Sarah Palin’s, but does harshly criticize McGinniss’ style of journalism. ““The Rogue” makes the Palins’ widely publicized anger understandable, even to readers who might have defended his right to set up shop in their neighborhood and soak up the local color,” Maslin writes. “Although most of “The Rogue” is dated, petty and easily available to anyone with Internet access, Mr. McGinniss used his time in Alaska to chase caustic, unsubstantiated gossip about the Palins, often from unnamed sources like ‘one resident’ and ‘a friend.’”
She's such a victim. Please send her more money so she can fight these lies.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSaraha Palin is a victim because she didn't do anything to deserve the hateful treatment she and her family have received from the media and their fellow citizens. As a politician, she's fair game for criticism, but any reasonable person knows the treatment she received went well beyond criticism of her politics and the scrutiny she and her family received is not typical when compared to other national candidates. The media quickly forgot about Barack Obama's connection to anti-American, anti-white Jeremiah Wright, but couldn't stop talking about Sarah's glasses, shoes and clothing allowance.
Sarah Palin was the not very well known Governor of Alaska when she accepted an invitation from John McCain to be his running mate. Much of what happened after that was in response to the public interest (obsession?) in her, not in response to anything she did - other than being herself. If she hadn't accepted McCain's invitation, she would still be the not very well known Governor of Alaska and McGinniss wouldn't be making money off a tabloid expose.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe problem the left has with her isn't policy driven - as with Bush - it's personal. If she goes out her door in the morning, they're on her. If she and the kids go to the grocery store, they're on her - and them. Sure, she's a public figure, but the left has gone after her as though she burned down their parent's house and killed their dog. It's truly disgusting in every sense of the word. Then they have the audacity to blame it on her. Just for comparison, our differences with Obama have been so blatanly based on policy, not personal, that Helen Keller could see it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJenna has it exactly right.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Mr. McGinniss used his time in Alaska to chase caustic, unsubstantiated gossip about the Palins, often from unnamed sources like ‘one resident’ and ‘a friend.’”
Sounds to me like the story the NYT peddled about John McCain having an affair a couple of weeks prior to the 2008 election. From what I remember they paid off the woman mentioned by name in the story. But they got their man into the WH so it was worth it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThere's something a little odd-sounding and premeditated about macho man Todd's response, don't you think?
I'd imagine most men in his position would be pretty enraged and calling forth the New York Times as an ally wouldn't be high on their list.
I can't help but be reminded of Nikki Haley's silent husband in the face of stories concerning her alleged philandering.
Yeah, I know. Everybody does it. But not everyone wears their morality on their sleeves as a political selling point.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI don't find it, at all, "premeditated" for someone with Todd's personality to go after the sleezy McGinnis as he does. Looks like, to me, that he's using the bible of the left's own review as a point of reference. Not that he's using them as an ally. So is what you're saying is that a husband can't defend his wife and if he does, it's questionable?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseQuite a sad little comment.
Why not come right out and admit that you believe every rumor in the book. And while you are at it, why not throw a little slander at another strong conservative woman - Nikki Haley.
Why are little men like you always, always, liberals?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJust broke my own rule about not feeding the trolls. Sorry, could not help it this time.
Solve Media is terrible and I make a point of noting each product & vowing to never purchase it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFeeding trolls is ok when you do it for fun. I thought its post was sad, too. The phalus-envy fairly drips from every letter. I suspect he is repressed, and repression of such feelings results in much human suffering.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI can't decide whether I hate the bad grammar or the utter illogic of this comment more. It's a surfeit of bad thinking on so many levels and in so few words, which is perhaps its only redeeming quality.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think it's great when Todd notes, "EVEN the New York Times..." Just so! In former days, it would have been enough to assert that the NYT says so, and everyone would assume that it must be true. But these days, the Times is so plainly in the tank to the Left that it only seems credible when it departs from its habitual orthodoxy.
Go get 'em, Todd. And Frank1914: In a match of "Quien es mas macho?" I'd bet on Todd over McGinness and the entire male staff of the NYT any day.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnd NR readers are also well aware that Ron Paul knows someone who's daughter did awful things, and that Ron Paul's body guards were perceived once as being nazi like (though they later appeared to be OK), and that Ron Paul's supporters are near lunatics.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWell, yeah.
Tell us something we don't know.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLongtime NR reader and I have no idea what you're talking about, other than the Ronulans being "near lunatics."
For that, all you need to do is post something negative about RON PAUL!!!11!!! It's as bad as saying something negative about Palin.
Decent folks, but their supporters can be a bit . . . over the top.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Longtime NR reader and I have no idea what you're talking about."
Then you must be taking a longtime to read the current dead tree issue and its hit piece on Ron Paul
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWell now, that's all true.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou don't have to be a big fan of Palin, which I am not, to think the level of hatred a lot of liberals have for her and her whole family is pretty sick.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou must be freshly transported from 2007.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI still don't understand the 3-year-long Mainstream Media's obsession with Sarah Palin.
If she's just a space cadet who stumbled into a governor's office, who cares?
If she only makes gaffes and misquotes The Founders, who cares?
If she's just a good-looking broad, who cares?
But if she realy connects with American voters...?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse