Sarah Palin Email Frenzy Backfires on her Media Antagonists

reply to post by hotaceline


sorry but that doesn't help anyone.

all 404 stuff.

reply to post by anon72


They look like, well, perfect representations of the Democratic mascot. The only reason they want to find dirt on her is that they fear her. They know she's the polar opposite of the phony currently living at 1600. So they dog, they take cheap pot shots at her family, her children. And she just smiles, and keeps talking. She's got far more class than any hundred of them. Run, Sarah, run!

Originally posted by Antiquated1
reply to post by anon72

 

I do not know how people keep such opposing thoughts running along side each other like that but I cannot do it. Look into Obama more before he gets into office and look into Palin more before she gets into office. What is the problem?

i thought obama is already in office ?

i thought "they" looked pretty hard at palin when she was a candidate for vp ?

i don't remember any deep dig campaigns when obama ran for any other office.

i thought "they" looked into palin when she ran for governor and maybe even that local position(s) she had.

BUT, i'm sure i am misunderstanding you yet again.

please correct me.

Originally posted by Antiquated1
*snip*
If she was squeaky clean, she would not have gone out of her way to avoid the official email account the governor is supposed to use. If she was squeaky clean, she would not have fought the FOIA or spent any amount of time pulling a single email or redacting one single line. All the same people that were so worrie about "if he has nothing to hide, then what is the problem" are the same ones calling anyone that looks into Palin a vulture. Her supporters are every bit as bad, if not worse than how they characterize "Obamabots."

So....when are you filing a FOIA document to demand that all of Obama's records are shown? Her records were screened, as they should be, for sensitive materials, which is legal and right. Obama, on the other hand, hides everything. What isn't hidden, is faked. Looking into her emails is a distraction, to keep people from noticing what Obama is up to. Same, for that matter, with Weiner. Nothing but blowing smoke, so people don't notice what's going on that actually matters.

Originally posted by Ghost375
Sarah Palin supporters are so disconnected from reality. They're so close-minded and delusional. I really don't feel like going into details because it won't change any Palin supporters minds, they're just way too close-minded. They won't ever listen to what I say, it would cause too much cognitive dissonance. It's really beyond the point of funny and now it's just sad.

So, your opinion is all that counts, and no matter what is said, you intend to dismiss it, and call all that disagree with you "close-minded". Clever tactic, that. Not very logical, though. Basically, you are claiming some things, and offering nothing in the way of evidence. If you are going to share the opinion, share the reasons for it. You seem so sure; surely you have evidence. Right?

What, precisely, makes you believe that Palin supporters are close-minded?
What makes you think they would not listen?

People are asking, which, to my way of thinking, shows your premise to me incorrect. By all means, though, offer the evidence. Happy to consider it.

Originally posted by anon72
Is the media going after Rick Santorum? NO

Is the media going after Newt-even after a huge part of his senios staff QUIT? NO

Is the medai ripping Ron Paul apart? NO

Is the media tearing into Herman Cain? NO

Is the media clobbering the "leader" of the Republican field-Rommey? NO-actually prasing him... ugh

Anyone else... other than PALIN-on such a large scale?

Think about it. They FEAR PALIN. And, for those of you who have bought into it-the whole BS mess.... Doom on you. Open your eyes for pete's sake.

Do you really want four more years of what Obama has done and is offering more of? He's FAILED.

You have to understand the real nature of the gender war to understand why the Media is going after her hard core. (I am going to get around to writing an essay on it. So I can copy and paste, rewriting on the fly is horrible)

Basically the gender war isn't about men, young men or boy's at all. America since it's inception has pretty much been a traditionalist matriarchy. At first there was no problem because as an agrarian nation leftist women had some sense of fulfillment(both men,women and children worked hard in their own way's) and frankly spoken no other choice period. Physical reality dictated more how men and women lived then any law or ideal.

Then came industrialization and the same concept of the entire family working came into play. Traditionalist women hated that, they hated working in factories and the dangers of it. Beginning as early as the 1840's-50's traditionalist women began to create the "ideal of womanhood". Our notions of women originate from that time period(that women are by default nurturing, empathic, yadda-yadda-yadda).

Nothing really happened until men got tired of being over worked and under payed and began the first labor movements. After that women latched onto it and began to take up the plight of Children. They pushed for Child labor law's to get children out of the factories so they would have a social justification to stay at home.
Around this time they also stabbed the men's labor movement in the back. Men where stuck working 16+ hours a day, with slightly better(but still lousy pay) pay and still in grossly unsafe conditions. This wouldn't be remedied until almost a 100 years later.

Anyways to get back on point, around this time traditionalist women realized that if they wanted to stay at home "their husbands"(traditionalist women may be loyal but there is some truth to feminist studies that show traditionalist women hate men more. They regard their husband and men in general to be domesticated animals,slaves[don't believe me look up Mothers of the Republic literature, it is in their own words]) would need easy access to job's.

So it sank in to traditionalist women that in order to get what they want all women had to be removed from the work force. It was traditionalist women like Palin who chased women out of the workforce in the 1800's to early 1900's. They protested, complained and other things.

Fast forward to the 60's-70's and the ideals of traditionalism waned and liberal, leftist women began to become a legitimate competing force due to numbers, but mostly due to the change in the nature of our physical reality thanks to technology.

They made great strides but hit a road block when they tried to pass the ERA(Equal Rights Amendment). Traditionalist women mustered the last of their strength because they where absolutely terrified of losing their gender privilege and shot the ERA down.

Since then leftist women have taken a dual strategy of poisoning the traditional matriarchy's well, aka the war on boy's. And of pushing for equality via other methods. Gender raunch plays a role( destroy traditionalist notions about the nature of women), but their primary method is advocating female supremacy in everything and near total male emasculation(so traditionalist women won't want them and so males in general want nothing to do with traditionalist "cave dwelling" women).

To that end they worked to completely destroy and annihilate all male support systems(clubs, groups, sports clubs, any organization that might enable male solidarity).

I guess they figure if they push the pendulum far enough by the time it re balances so many generations(at this point probably take 2-4 generations for males to achieve meaningful equality) would have gone by that most of what they have done would stick and traditionalist women would become extinct.

But feminist's didn't count on a meaningful MRM at all. They are just scrabbling together now in an attempt to co-opt it(changing their own message to be less hostile to males, and setting up puppets:[A perfect example is the "Good Men Project", a disgusting attempt by leftist's to hijack the MRM after we just got done kicking traditionalist's to the curb]).

Anyways Palin represents a very, very serious threat to their plans. While Bachmann is more of a moderate traditionalist, Center-right. Not a threat to them at all. If anything she may aid in their attempts by being a "good role model" to both leftist and rightist women, but I am going off course again.

Take it or leave it, but this is the reason why.



P.S if Romney wins I am leaving the Republican party! And I doubt I will be the only one.

reply to post by korathin


wow, didn't understand a word of that.

or it's relevance.

nice post tho.

Originally posted by fooks
reply to post by korathin

 

wow, didn't understand a word of that.

or it's relevance.

nice post tho.

fudge sickle.

Read it slower, then look everything up as you go along. I think I put in way to much info, or I keep forgetting not everyone is a history book worm...
The relevance is WHY the leftist media is so scared of Palin. In the post I explained the WHY, the history of the WHY and where the WHY is going.

"Anyways Palin represents a very, very serious threat to their plans. While Bachmann is more of a moderate traditionalist, Center-right. Not a threat to them at all. If anything she may aid in their attempts by being a "good role model" to both leftist and rightist women, but I am going off course again."


ok, now i have something.

bachmann is so mainstream, i don't trust her at all.

sarah is the real deal.

she sets standards these chumps will never live up too.

do the frikin job and don't keep money in your freezer or "forget" to pay your taxes, or you pick anything you want too! run a male prostitute ring out of your house barney!

sex tweet, blue dress, hiking in the Appalachians, waiters tied up in the closet, arrrrnold, edwards, my head spins.

i'm done with these idiots.

reply to post by fooks


no prob.

got it, i'm slow.

Originally posted by fooks

"Anyways Palin represents a very, very serious threat to their plans. While Bachmann is more of a moderate traditionalist, Center-right. Not a threat to them at all. If anything she may aid in their attempts by being a "good role model" to both leftist and rightist women, but I am going off course again."


ok, now i have something.

bachmann is so mainstream, i don't trust her at all.

sarah is the real deal.

she sets standards these chumps will never live up too.

do the frikin job and don't keep money in your freezer or "forget" to pay your taxes, or you pick anything you want too! run a male prostitute ring out of your house barney!

sex tweet, blue dress, hiking in the Appalachians, waiters tied up in the closet, arrrrnold, edwards, my head spins.

i'm done with these idiots.

I think you completely missed the point. Basically there is a risk from their point of view that Palin will try to turn the clock back.

you intellectualize all you want,

that is the real problem here,

lot's and lot's of people don't care how many brains ya'll got.


is it behind door #3 or door #2 or what?

don't blow smoke up our ass, say it(sam kenison)

lol, watch this! even a young weiner and bachman,

www.youtube.com...

funny and not too ot!

Originally posted by mishigas
She actively fought against corruption in AK state goverment, and i wouldn't doubt her email was watched, and she knew it.

So she was smart enough to use that ultra-secure yahoo account? That must have been genius.
Sarah Palin's Email hacked
Be sure and read up on how it was only hacked because it was so easy to hack a yahoo account.

Smart, foxy lady that she is, she knew when to hide emails that would tip her opponents off to her next move.

That sounds like a guess and a hope. If any of what you are saying has one bit of value then those emails would now be in this email dump. Be sure and let me know when you find any evidence that Sarah was smart enough to use an email everyone could read instead of official government emails that would hav been at least slightly more secure.

Originally posted by xuenchen
i thought obama is already in office ?

And the right has not stopped whining about how they have not seen his doctors notes, high school grades, kindergarten enrollment forms, college essays, etc. Why wait until Palin is in office to start that all over again?

i thought "they" looked pretty hard at palin when she was a candidate for vp ?

I cannot help what you thought.

i don't remember any deep dig campaigns when obama ran for any other office.

So why look into anyone else in the future?

i thought "they" looked into palin when she ran for governor and maybe even that local position(s) she had.

You certainly thought wrong. No one cared about Palin outside of Alaska when she ran for governor.

BUT, i'm sure i am misunderstanding you yet again.

please correct me.

I really do not even know what you are trying to say.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
So....when are you filing a FOIA document to demand that all of Obama's records are shown?

Right after I finish my FOIA request for Palin's ... oh right, I never filed that one either. Nor have I looked at her emails.

Her records were screened, as they should be, for sensitive materials, which is legal and right.

Tell me how Palin was so clever that she hid all that important sensitive material away in her yahoo account. Is that where you would keep sensitive information?

Are there any members of ATS that honestly think a great place to hide secure information is in yahoo-mail? Make that case for me if you want to whine about "sensitive material" or move along with that lame argument.

Obama, on the other hand, hides everything. What isn't hidden, is faked.

Faked? The moon landing? birth certificates? Be specific? Then you can explain to me how two wrongs will finally make a right.

Looking into her emails is a distraction, to keep people from noticing what Obama is up to. Same, for that matter, with Weiner. Nothing but blowing smoke, so people don't notice what's going on that actually matters.

Then why are you here defending her emails instead of reminding us what is really important? All I am doing is watching the same people that cry that we should have known more about Obama before he was elected go on to also cry that anyone tried to look into Palin...you know...before she becomes president.
You are barking up the wrong tree here. I am not looking for reasons to like Palin because Obama can be knocked too. I am looking for reasons to like Palin because Palin has any. When all you can do is say "well Obama this and that" all you do is remind people that already like Palin to defend her more.
If I already support Obama, knocking him just makes me less likely to hear you.
If I do not support Obama, knocking him just reminds me you have nothing good to say about Palin.
If I already support Palin, you do not need to convince me.

Keep wasting your time with that though. I think anyone that wants to run for office should be scrutinized, no matter how much the other person before them was not. I also do not believe Palin will be running.for office. I am just having a hard time not noticing the huge scramble by her lemmings to trip over their own principals in order to protect her from the same level of scrutiny they believe any and everyone else should be under.

All you Palin worshippers seem to think she is some kind of deity. That is fine. It just seems like you can relax and stop worrying that people are going through her emails. Remember, she is super moral, just, good, altruistic, worried about the people, honest, etc.etc.etc. She surely has nothing to hide.

They are going after these people(Palin) because they dont want REAL CANDIDATES to be spoken about.

AHEM.. RON PAUL.

Keep the name Palin in peoples ears instead of PAUL that way they dont even think about voting republican.
That way instead of researching for themselves, all they will hear about is PALIN. So they are forced to go the other way instead of educating themselves.

Look over here....
(slaps you on other side of face)

Its called distraction people.

......And it seems to be working.

Ever wonder why the only time you hear about Palin is when its the Left trashing her and not the right trying to prop her up into any kind of position of power?

The right doesnt want Palin as a leader.

Palin was chosen by one man, not the entire republican party.

So the liberals and all that hate alike; should not be worried as much as they do about her. The right will never put her in power on such a large scale(They actually vette their candidates).

reply to post by sweetliberty


Next, she needs to release her medical records, and the birth certificate of Trig.

Originally posted by guitarplayer
reply to post by sheepslayer247

 

Bo did not finsh his term as senator and to the other poster BO has not relased his school grades or anyother papers in his life.

"Bo" served 3 full terms in the state senate but you only recall the US senate seat he held for 3 years? Tell me what Obama's resume has to do with Palin? What did she do? She quit her last job just because. He left his last job because he got elected to a higher seat. She went on to work for a tv station. He went on to be president. Comparing the two does what for her? How about we see her resume and judge her on that? Obama saying "57 states" does not make Palin smart either.

reply to post by sweetliberty


She is a reactionary, not a visonary.

Originally posted by AGWskeptic
I want to know why the media is going so far to "vet" Palin, yet there are huge gaps in Obama's past he is fighting hard to keep hidden.

If only former sportscaster and current television network employee Sarah Palin had an in with the media. Imagine if she was smart, powerful, and had access to a global television network. If only.