Friday, August 20, 2010
I do not understand why Sarah Palin would come to the defense of Dr. Laura, via Twitter. If she wants to be a serious national politician with wide appeal, why comment at all about Dr. Laura -- what is gained? If she wants to comment, why tweet?
Dr.Laura=even more powerful & effective w/out the shackles, so watch out Constitutional obstructionists. And b thankful 4 her voice,America!Nationally syndicated conservative columnist Deroy Murdock is quoted in the Daily Beast:
Dr.Laura:don't retreat...reload! (Steps aside bc her 1st Amend.rights ceased 2exist thx 2activists trying 2silence"isn't American,not fair")
“Sarah Palin's tweets resemble something scribbled by a ninth-grade cheerleader. Is it asking too much for a reputed American political leader to communicate in complete sentences? Palin's gravitas gap is growing into the Gravitas Canyon,” said the media fellow at the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University. “Even worse, she deploys her vacuity to defend an acerbic talk-show host who just detonated herself by tossing around the word 'nigger' on the air 11 times, as if it were a volleyball. The American right can do better than this. And it must."Actually, my niece was a ninth-grade cheerleader last year, and her text messages to me were nicely written, but Murdock's point is valid.
I have speculated previously that Sarah Palin has little interest in being a national candidate, and prefers life as it is now -- she can spend as much time with her family as she pleases, and make a good living on the lecture circuit with a handful of trips to the Lower 48. Her base will remain, and her base is passionate about her. In a post-Obama United States -- whether in 2012 or 2016 -- a successful candidate for president will have broader appeal than she currenty enjoys.
UPDATE: Sarah Palin has a longer explanation of her defense of Dr. Laura on Facebook. I believe that in terms of media and channel, this is a better forum than Twitter for a national politician. However, I do not understand the phrase, "taking back my First Amendment Rights," as it relates to Dr. Laura. Was there a government entity that threatened to shut her down? The First Amendment protections regarding free speech and free press are not a shield against criticism from other individual citizens.
Palin wrote a much longer piece on her facebook page, which is compelling. I suggest you link to it because in fairness, her face book comment hits the issue of liberal attempts to silence conservative women very directly
This was pure Palin, why she is such an invigorating politician -- a wonderful, stirring defense of individuality and a reminder of the endless liberal/leftist campaign against it, especially in conservative women.
My reaction to this is rather like my reaction to the Dixie Chicks whining about censorship 7 years ago. When people object to the content of your speech, and even when they use their first amendment rights to bring financial pressure against you, it is not censorship. I think Palin makes some good points in her Facebook post, but the use of twitter was not particularly effective--unless the aim was to get attention, in which case, it worked, though as is usual in the case of Palin, much of that is negative.
I agree that the First Amendment issue is mistakenly framed. These folks are not lawyers. I am sure that Dr. L got hammered for her comments in somewhat the same way as Imus did a few years ago and she feels like she is unable to respond as a public radio figure. Resigning will allow her to say what she wants without the repercussions from rabid politicians.
I have never heard Dr. Laura, but the think the first amendment issue referred to has to do with her sponsors tossing her under the bus for her remarks.
As to the tweets, they are in general a good example of social media being anti social and very affected.
I have also read a number of Palin's facebook short essays. Whether or not her thinking is sufficiently deep I'll leave to others, but I would note that she writes clearly and coherently. There is no 'deer in the headlights' quality to her thinking when she has time to organize it. I think someone who only read her writing, and was unaware of all adverse image creation in the media and political realm, would think her a reasonably intelligent person who does her research.
I would also point out that the facebook posts have been enormously influential. "Death panels" was her creation and debuted on facebook.
Murdock needs to take a few reality pills. The syntax for tweeting (and it's a concept I understand but have never done, and don't plan on doing) is significantly different that posting in FB or a blog for that matter.
He really ought to get a grip.
Right- Murdock doesn't seem to know that there is a kind of shorthand for a lot of tweeting and text messaging. It uses abbreviations and spells words in unusual ways. This is not a problem for most people. If he didn't hate Palin, he wouldn't be complaining about it.
Lawrence Auster had a post about Dr. Laura recently:
"I just got around to reading the exchange between radio host Laura Schlessinger and a black female caller in which Dr. Laura repeatedly said the word “nigger.” There was nothing there to object to. Laura was not saying “nigger” in her own voice; rather, she was describing and quoting black men who say “nigger.” I have not followed the controversy closely, but the widespread condemnation of Schlessinger for her use of “nigger” in that exchange makes it clear that an extraordinary new rule of liberalism has now been put in place. Under this rule, not only is it prohibited for whites to say “nigger,” even though blacks and especially black performers say it all the time, but it is prohibited for whites to refer to the fact that blacks say “nigger” or to quote blacks saying “nigger.”
Sarah, I personally support you exercising your 1st Amendment rights, as you define them. Please rant some more on twitter. Of course, continue with the followup explanations on Facebook as we need them to translate your secret code (thank you Rebecca Mansour for all your hard work).
This recent Dr. Laura thing was brilliant. Amazing how you defend her saying the “n” word and suggesting people shouldn’t marry outside their race if they don’t have a sense of humor. I love that you would demand Rahm Emanuel’s resignation should he ever utter the same word. Yes, and fire him for using the “r” word but protect Rush Limbaugh’s and Glen Beck’s use of it. Such a logical minefield you’ve developed. Few minds can understand…but I do.
Keep up the good work.
I think there is a more interesting point that Escort81 points to about Palin not being a serious candidate. Could it be that she becomes "the worse" alternative to Mitt Romney or to a Tim Pawlenty or to a Mitch Daniels; where the liberals spend all of their time and energy ripping her that these guys will step in and look far more presidential? If that is her plan - it is brilliant and the conservative movement will be all the better for it. She will be wealthy beyond her wildest dreams and we will have our best and brightest at the helm. If this is not the bigger plan, then making ridiculous tweets defending the indefensible is nothing short of moronic. I consider myself to be a fairly well-read and update American and I did not need to hear the Dr. Laura rant to realize that she went down a path she should not have (as she is prone to do). By Sarah Palin defending her right to free speech the only thing the average "Joe-Bag-of-Donuts is going to hear is that she thinks the "N" word is acceptable. This only furthers a wrong-headed stereo-type conservatives already have to regularly defend is that we are not all closet KKKers.
Sarah Palin's been complaining about her very-much-still-in-tact First Amendment rights ever since she hit the klieg lights, first claiming that her rights were violated because the press criticized her for her negative attacks on Obama during the campaign. She hasn't stopped blathering about them since.
Governon half-term Palin should stop tweeting (or talking) for 30 seconds to read the First Amendment. All 45 or so words of it. It bars the Government from abridging free speech rights. It doesn't have anything to do with whether someone criticzes what she says or Dr. Laura says.
In fact when the press criticizes either of them. it is a classic example of First Amendment rights being exercised, not abridged.
Palin's an embarrassment. A grizzly momma bear embrarrassment.
As for Dr. Laura, I don't know whether I am more dismayed at what she said or that someone chose to call her for interracial realtionship advice.
I am extremely disappointed in the choice of Sarah Palin as the Vice Presidential candidate of the Republican Party. I will still vote for Senator McCain, because I am very concerned about having a fundamental leftist, especially one who is a marvelous orator, as President.
I’m stunned - couldn’t the Republican Party find one competent female with adult children to run for Vice President with McCain? I realize his advisors probably didn’t want a “mature” woman, as the Democrats keep harping on his age. But really, what kind of role model is a woman whose fifth child was recently born with a serious issue, Down Syndrome, and then goes back to the job of Governor within days of the birth?
So, one Vice Presidential candidate and her daughter demonstrate, under conditions of great stress, that babies are valued human beings, not punishment. However, that same VP candidate came forth in April of 2008 with a proclamation for “Family Child Care Week,” in which she wrote: “These professionals are positive role models for the children they care for and the communities they serve.” Clearly, Palin sees the need for positive role models. I suggest that they be Mommy and Daddy, and not the hired help.
Child-care facilities are a necessity when mothers and fathers (when they exist at all) are unwilling or incapable of caring for their offspring. Unfortunately, they have become a mainstay of the feminista mentality that nothing should stand in the way of a woman’s ambition - nothing, including her family.
Ouch. Them's fightin' words Dr. Laura
File under: You can't make this stuff up.
Lawerence Auster does make a good point and agrees with Dr. Laura. I personally like Dr. Laura and her methods. She is harsh. Mr. Auster's post can be read here Dr. Laura, the "N" word, and the rule of black supremacy
James Edwards writes what he thinks is the real reason that Dr. Laura quit:
That makes no sense whatsoever. What does make sense is that after her “rant” made national headlines, she got a call from the network demanding she apologize or be fired immediately. So she groveled in order to save her multi-million dollar a year income, no doubt hoping that her apology would be the end of it. But it wasn’t, and even though the network let her keep her job until her contract is up at the end of the year, they made it clear she’s fired after that.
Read the rest here: Dr. Laura quitting radio to reclaim her 1st Amendment rights?
Dr. Laura will be sorely missed.
So, don't use Twitter. Those who do, those who choose to 'live-by-short-hand' appreciate the effort.
Want nuance go to Facebook.
Palin tends to use whatever gets there.
As a result, I would say understimation is her biggest weapon of result.