It would seem that the New York Times has discovered Sarah Palin is actually a politician.
Once Elected, Palin Hired Friends and Lashed Foes
This was the headline for the NYT article detailing all the investigative reporting done by the Obama campaign….er, I mean, the New York Times staff of professional reporters and researchers.
Since Palin has an 86% approval rating, and since the NYT seems not to have interviewed much of anyone who actually likes Palin, they must have just canvassed the 14%.
Here is a typical paragraph.
Throughout her political career, she has pursued vendettas, fired officials who crossed her and sometimes blurred the line between government and personal grievance, according to a review of public records and interviews with 60 Republican and Democratic legislators and local officials.
Hmm…. I wonder what the NYT had to say about Hillary’s firing of the White House Travel Office staff to install her cronies, and the fact that Hillary sicced the FBI on innocent people to do so. Maybe, page 27 of section G, in the lower right below the “unwanted hair removal” ad, in the issue published about 6 months after it was all over?
Of course, given Palin’s reformer credentials, when you’ve just spent years bucking your own party as well as the opposition party, you’re going to make enemies on both sides. John McCain already knows about this: many in his own party have been very critical about him, and of course the Democratic side thinks he is Semyaza in the flesh. BTW, note the slippery weasel wording of the sentence above. What, exactly, is meant by “60 Republican and Democratic legislators and local officials”? Why doesn’t the article simply say how many of each? Inquiring minds want to know.
Still, Ms. Palin has many supporters.
Well, yeah. Like, 86% of the populace.
As a two-term mayor she paved roads and built an ice rink, and as governor she has pushed through higher taxes on the oil companies that dominate one-third of the state’s economy. She stirs deep emotions. In Wasilla, many residents display unflagging affection, cheering “our Sarah” and hissing at her critics.
Uh, not just in Wasilla. That 86% rating is for the entire state. But of course, the agenda journalism of the Times requires downplaying that fact whenever possible. It’s hard to caricature the mouthpiece of the Left…. whatever you can think of is probably just business as usual. What’s very clear is this: the NYT staff made no attempt to give a balanced portrayal of how Sarah Palin is seen in Alaska, nor did it shy away from taking the word of self-serving people whose story is uncorroborated by anyone else. It is very clear that the NYT’s entire agenda was to “dig up dirt”, and if little dirt was to be found, then they would photograph the dust from very close up.
I would like to say that I await similar investigative determination in pursuing Obama’s political affiliations and machinations… except, of course, that I would be a fool to await the NYTimes to do any such thing.
For NYT subscribers: isn’t that an awful lot of money to spend just to read the cartoons, line the kitty litter box and light your fireplace?
Update and bump: Powerline weighs in.