"She has also hinted at a possible run for the top job in 2012 during a flurry of national television interviews this week, telling one network she would "plough through that door" if it was God's will."
Regardless of why the media chooses to cover this story almost as much as the fires in Calfornia is disturbing. Gov. Palin's spot in the limelight despite her loss makes me want to to tell her something that Willy Wonka says so well:
However, she doesn't seem to get that message from Mr. Wonka. She continues to talk about the same things she spoke about throughout the campaign, yet Americans seemed to reject (based on polling here) her general message. I find it interesting that the media chooses to continue to cover this (A news.google.com search of palin + 2012 will net almost 13,000 articles) despite the fact that Obama has not even been sworn in yet. While there is precedent for a losing VP candidate to run for President in the next election (Lieberman 04) a Google News search in the date range of past elections does not produce nearly as many results or as much of a discussion as a simmilar Palin search.
It seems that coverage of the Palin-2012 concept is overdone, if not unnessary at all. I think that media should be covering Obama's plans for the next 4 years and not the campaign that has yet to even begin. It is a disservice to the American people for the media to be calling the Palin-2012 news, as it is nothing more than speculation.
6 comments:
LOL. Love the wonka bit.
But c'mon. She's a captivating figure, but more than that, she is the only face of the republican party right now.
I would agree if the coverage focused more on her role as the party leader (i.e. a run for Senate in 2010?) But the coverage focuses specifically on the possibility of her candidacy for President in 2012.
You write: "I find it interesting that the media chooses to continue to cover this." Interesting, to be sure, but offer your thoughts on why this is so, and why they do not do what you propose, instead.
BTW: Any excuse for Gene Wilder is a good excuse.
I am searching to support my idea that perhaps the Palin camp (her supporters and the Right of the Republican Party) is pressuring media to cover her potential candidacy to get the idea into the heads of Americans now. This way when it happens they wont be too shocked.
Sarah Palin sells tickets to the media show, at least for a certain kind of media reader (read: Wonkette reader). She's ridiculous and fascinating. Look at the press her "candid photos" got today. It's like combining the tabloid world with the political world. For those who love Page 6 AND C-SPAN, it's practically heroin. I speak from experience (experience with Palin, not experience with heroin).
I am very intersted as to why you find the coverage of Governor Palin "disturbing". Is it because you truly find it a waste of time or because you think it is encroaching on Barack Obamas face time in the media? Dont you worry- I highly doubt that I will be able to turn on the TV for the next 4 (or even 8 years) without seeing Barack Obamas face. Additionally, the sheer amout of Palin 2012 hits on the internet must tell you something. It shows that she has clearly piqued the interest of many Americans who see her as the new, fresh face of the Republican party. She represents a new generation of Republicans who want change, just as Barack Obama does. Barack Obama cant monopolize the idea of change, progress, and the breaking down of barriers. And you would think the Democratic party would have at least pretended to be pleased with the idea of any woman as VP on ANY ticket, for it represents the breaking down of barriers in the US (as does a black president), but that clearly wasnt so. And lastly, in reference to Palin 2012 being speculation, (which it very well may be) you know as well as I do-the media is SPECULATION. So please be honest and dont just relegate the label of speculation for the Palin 2012 story, because you know its not exclusive.
Post a Comment