Wednesday, February 2, 2011
As many already know, some in the lamestream media anointed February Ignore Sarah Palin Month. Let's not even talk about how pathetically sad it is to have to come face to face with your obsession and the need to get it under control.
When I first heard about it, I wished them well in their recovery and hoped they'd be seeking intensive therapy in the interim. Dana Milbank of The Washington Post is in need a whole lot of help. He recently confessed:
Though it is embarrassing to admit this in public, I can no longer hide the truth. I have a Sarah Palin problem.
I feel powerless to control my obsession, even though it cheapens and demeans me.
But today is the first day of the rest of my life. And so, I hereby pledge that, beginning on Feb. 1, 2011, I will not mention Sarah Palin -- in print, online or on television -- for one month. Furthermore, I call on others in the news media to join me in this pledge of a Palin-free February.
Today is only February 2nd, so how did our friend, Dana, do yesterday on Day 1? Andy Barr wrote an article published in Politico today which highlights Milbank's struggle to remain silent even on the first day of his self-imposed moratorium. Barr writes:
Dana Milbank is orchestrating a high-profile “moratorium” on covering Palin, kicking off his month-long fast yesterday by doing an interview all about it on ABC’s “Top Line” - and Sarah’s supporters are not amused.
“Do you hate clicks? Do you hate reading your stories?” ABC’s Rick Klein asked the Washington Post columnist, who declared he has “sworn off clicks and readership for the entire month of February, but I’m working about an extended opus about she who will not be named for March 1st.”
Milbank highlighted his lack of commentary by posting on the paper’s website a link of his interview – rife with allusions to and jokes about the former Alaska governor.
Palin’s supporters weren’t happy.
“Milbank couldn't even get through the first day of his bogus boycott,” wrote a blogger for Texas for Palin, one of a network of Palin-defending sites that dinged the columnist. “This afternoon on the Post Partisan blog, Milbank wrote: ‘I survived Day One of my February Sarah Palin moratorium...’ Sorry, Skippy, but you weren't even going to mention her name, remember?”
PalinTV – a site set up by Palin supporters to show the governor’s comments in full without the media filter – also smacked Milbank with a sarcastic tweet. “Dana Milbank on ABC today talking for 5 minutes about how he's not talking about Palin,” it read.
While Dana Milbank can't find the strength to honor his own Ignore Sarah Palin Month for a day, Rachel Maddow of MSNBC might want to get on board and give it a try. She embarrassed herself greatly yesterday as she reported as fact a satirical story about Governor Palin encouraging an attack on Egypt. One of the side effects of Palin Derangement Syndrome is jumping all over stories about her with no commitment to discovering facts. Another side effect is not taking responsibility afterwards but blaming others for your ridiculous errors.
Josh of Texas4Palin covered the story. He writes:
We posted Tuesday about how MSPDS host Rachel Maddow, whom the left touts as "brilliant" (like Bill Clinton, she's a Rhodes scholar), fell hook, line and sinker Monday for an internet spoof by a satirical website that Gov. Sarah Palin was advocating an attack on Egypt.
Maddow took 24 hours to come up with an excuse, and, as Noel Sheppard reports, on Tuesday's program explained that it was all conservatives' fault, in particular that diabolical Glenn Beck:
And that was Maddow’s explanation for getting duped by a satirical website: in her view, conservatives – especially Glenn Beck – are saying all kinds of crazy things. As a result, it’s become difficult for her to know what’s real and what’s a spoof.
If this is the case, then maybe she should stop reporting on what conservatives are saying.
If she can no longer discern between fact and fiction, serious commentary and satire, she can’t possibly be trusted or taken seriously about anything, for who knows what her next source will be and whether or not it’s actually legitimate.
Maybe more importantly, how can anyone on television – Rhodes scholar or not! – be deserving of the public’s trust if she blames her own mistakes on others not at all involved in her program?
Sadly, this is par for the course on MSNBC as well as other liberal media outlets.
These are the same people that disgustingly blamed conservatives for the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) last month. They’re used to pointing fingers at others without merit.
I will conclude today by wishing the lamestream media well in their
Just for the fun of it, take a look at how giddy Maddow is as she reports as fact this internet spoof. If it weren't so pathetic, it might be hilarious. Okay, it is hilarious.
(h/t Josh Painter)