# Sarah Palin's book **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [November 14, 2009, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521 "2009-11-14T03:45:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/41 "2009-11-15T10:03:44Z")
And [here](http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/11/13/us/politics/AP-US-Palin-Book-Fact-Check.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2)’s the NY Times fact-checking her book. One highlight: > [@](#): > > PALIN: Says Ronald Reagan faced an even worse recession than the one that appears to be ending now, and ‘‘showed us how to get out of one. If you want real job growth, cut capital gains taxes and slay the death tax once and for all.’’ > > THE FACTS: The estate tax, which some call the death tax, was not repealed under Reagan and capital gains taxes are lower now than when Reagan was president. > > Economists overwhelmingly say the current recession is far worse. The recession Reagan faced lasted for 16 months; this one is in its 23rd month. The recession of the early 1980s did not have a financial meltdown. Unemployment peaked at 10.8 percent, worse than the October 2009 high of 10.2 percent, but the jobless rate is still expected to climb. Glad to see she has her finger on the pulse of today’s problems… ---
**Author:** ![Quercus\_alba](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quercus_alba/32/4061_2.png) [@Quercus\_alba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quercus_alba)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/42 "2009-11-15T16:29:17Z")
> [@Camus](#): > > …Describing someone as “not particularly bright” and “not particularly curious” as well as prone to spouting recycled, pre-programmed garbage sounds pretty close to calling someone irredeemably stupid who lacks genuine ideas of their own. This is not someone who should be considered a serious candidate for any political office. I think you just described our last president… So, have they sold the movie rights? “Tina Fey _is_ Sarah Palin in ‘Going Rogue–the Movie’”😃 ---
**Author:** ![Chefguy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chefguy/32/138_2.png) [@Chefguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chefguy)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/43 "2009-11-15T17:23:39Z")
> [@ArchiveGuy](#): > > And [here](http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/11/13/us/politics/AP-US-Palin-Book-Fact-Check.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2)’s the NY Times fact-checking her book. One highlight:Glad to see she has her finger on the pulse of today’s problems… She also blames the bailout package on Obama, even though McCain voted for it, she supported it, and Bush signed it. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/44 "2009-11-15T19:00:48Z")
> [@Chefguy](#): > > She also blames the bailout package on Obama, even though McCain voted for it, she supported it, and Bush signed it. It will take endless vigilance to prevent the false notion that “everything was fine under Bush, and then immediately went to hell under a spend-happy Obama” from taking root in the dimwitted national consciousness. It will only get worse as time passes beyond our historical attention span (i.e., in a few weeks), and Palin and others realize they have everything to gain and nothing to lose by promulgating and nourishing such an idiotic lie. ---
**Author:** ![PrettyVacant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/49beb7/32.png) [@PrettyVacant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PrettyVacant)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/45 "2009-11-15T19:08:55Z")
It sounds like Dubya all over again; the perfect vessel for the right to fill with their ideas. Also like Dubya, there’s no way she has the faculties to write a book. ---
**Author:** ![TWDuke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@TWDuke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TWDuke)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/46 "2009-11-15T20:01:36Z")
It’s no secret she had a [collaborator](http://mediamatters.org/research/200911130011). > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I think it’s a nice look into the workings of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Everything is somebody else’s fault. Nothing is her own. She has no responsibility for anything. If everyone had listened to her, things would have been fine. Jesus, what self-serving tripe. Is there anyone in her life she doesn’t eventually turn on? Oh, so you’ve read it. > [@](#): > > I understand she even tries to blame Katie Couric for the fact that she couldn’t answer softball questions from Katie Couric. So… you haven’t read it. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/47 "2009-11-15T22:50:42Z")
I’ve read excerpts and reviews. The NY Times fact check is also quite entertaining. This is a woman who never stops creating her own reality. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/48 "2009-11-15T23:03:52Z")
If I had to choose between reading this book and shoving it up my ass, I wouldn’t even stop to ask for some K-Y. The sooner we stop taking her seriously, the better. ---
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2009, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/49 "2009-11-15T23:55:04Z")
[The AP fact checks Sarah’s book.](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/13/palins-book-goes-rogue-on_n_357682.html) [Sarah Palin fact checks the AP’s fact checking of Sarah Palin’s book.](http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/palin-ap-fact-check-of-my-book-is-opposition-research.php) ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/50 "2009-11-16T00:15:19Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > [Sarah Palin fact checks the AP’s fact checking of Sarah Palin’s book.](http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/palin-ap-fact-check-of-my-book-is-opposition-research.php) That may be what she calls it, but I don’t see any actual facts being checked, there. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/51 "2009-11-16T00:26:37Z")
She doesn’t actually deny anything the AP said, she just whines about it, and plays the victim card again. Don’t her fans ever get tired of this bitch crying all the time? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/52 "2009-11-16T00:40:09Z")
> [@ArchiveGuy](#): > > A good time for a [Lies of Sarah Palin](http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/11/the-odd-lies-of-sarah-palin-a-roundup.html) recap. > > And yes, while one or two may be judgment calls (as Bricker takes pains to mention), the vast majority are fairly clearcut and indisputable. One or two? > [@](#): > > Palin lied when she said the dismissal of her public safety commissioner, Walt Monegan, had nothing to do with his refusal to fire state trooper Mike Wooten; in fact, the Branchflower Report concluded that she repeatedly abused her power when dealing with both men. Finding number two from the Branchflower Report: > [@](#): > > I find that, although Walt Monegan’s refusal to fire Trooper Michael Wooten was not the sole reason he was fired by Governor Sarah Palin, it was likely a contributing factor to his termination as Commissioner of Public Safety. In spite of that, Governor Palin’s firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads. The best the Branchflower Report says is that he finds it _likely_ that the refusal to fire was a factor – and even then, not the sole reason. You can hardly call her denial a clearcut and indisputable lie. Not a lie. Lie vs. Total Score: 0-1. > [@](#): > > Palin lied when she repeatedly claimed to have said, “Thanks, but no thanks” to the Bridge to Nowhere; in fact, she openly campaigned for the federal project when running for governor. She didn’t campaign for it, but she sure expressed an intention to use the funds. Clearcut lie. Lie vs. Total Score: 1-2. > [@](#): > > Palin lied when she denied that Wasilla’s police chief and librarian had been fired; in fact, both were given letters of termination the previous day. This seems like Clintonian parsing. She says “'There’s been no meeting, no actual terminations.” But the letter given to the chief, at least, said, “I intend to terminate you…” So she might have been technically right, but to me, if someone says, “I’m going to fire you,” it’s highly disingenuous to claim that I haven’t been fired. Lie. Lie vs. Total Score: 2-3. > [@](#): > > Palin lied when she wrote in the NYT that a comprehensive review by Alaska wildlife officials showed that polar bears were not endangered; in fact, email correspondence between those scientists showed the opposite. I can’t tell. Every report on this says that Rick Steiner requested and got e-mail correspondence that proves Palin lied when she said that an Alaska study showed polar bears were not in danger. Steiner is an environmental activist, and the e-mails are never quoted. In page after page, it says: “Polar bears are in danger, records show.” It’s very odd that the actual e-mail giving lie to Palin’s claim is never quoted or reproduced. So what this comes down to is Steiner calling Palin a liar, and a zillion anti-Palin source srepeating it uncritically. Not enough to call it a lie. Not a lie. Lie vs. Total Score: 2-4. > [@](#): > > Palin lied when she claimed in her convention speech that an oil gas pipeline “began” under her guidance; in fact, the pipeline was years from breaking ground, if at all. She said she begana pipeline. But beginning a project doesn’t mean breaking ground; any project like that must begin with planning and budgeting and securing permits and conducting studies. To say that this is a lie because the actual ground-breaking was years away is absurd. Not a lie. Lie vs. Total Score: 2-5. > [@](#): > > Palin lied when she told Charlie Gibson that she does not pass judgment on gay people; in fact, she opposes all rights between gay spouses and belongs to a church that promotes conversion therapy. And it’s possible she doesn’t pass judgement on them. Obama’s membership in Rev. Wright’s church was not a reason to impute “God damn America” to Obama. Why is Palin’s church different? It’s unclear what she means by “judgement,” in any event. Not a lie. Lie vs. Total Score: 2-6. > [@](#): > > Palin lied when she denied having said that humans do not contribute to climate change; in fact, she had previously proclaimed that human activity was not to blame. Lie. Lie vs. Total Score: 3-7. > [@](#): > > Palin lied when she claimed that Alaska produces 20 percent of the country’s domestic energy supply; in fact, the actual figures, based on any interpretation of her words, are much, much lower. I might have said she was simply mistaken, but she was given a chance to clarify and her revision was still off the mark. I’ll give this one a ‘lie’ score. Lie. Lie vs. Total Score: 4-8. > [@](#): > > Palin lied when she told voters she improvised her convention speech when her teleprompter stopped working properly; in fact, all reports showed that the machine had functioned perfectly and that her speech had closely followed the script. She said: “The teleprompter got messed up, I couldn’t follow it, and I just decided I’d just talk to the people in front of me.” McCain-Palin campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds says no, and Sullivan accepts this as the gospel. But McCain-Palin spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker says yes, “She was off the prompter at points.” I suppose it’s possible that the machien worked fine and she simply got confused, but Sullivan’s point is that the script was followed, and both Palin and Hazelbaker deny this. Why is the word of one campaign source solid and the word of another dismissed? Insufficient evidence to call this a clearcut lie. Not a lie. Lie vs. Total Score: 4-9. > [@](#): > > Palin lied when she recalled asking her daughters to vote on whether she should accept the VP offer; in fact, her story contradicts details given by her husband, the McCain campaign, and even Palin herself. (She later added another version.) Lie. Lie vs. Total Score: 5-9. > [@](#): > > Palin lied when she claimed to have taken a voluntary pay cut as mayor; in fact, as councilmember she had voted against a raise for the mayor, but subsequent raises had taken effect by the time she was mayor. Not a lie. Her comment: "“As mayor I took a voluntary pay cut, which didn’t thrill my husband; and then as governor I cut the personal chef position from the budget, and that didn’t thrill my hungry kids.” The actual truth: “As a Council member she voted against hiking the mayor’s salary from $64,000 to $68,000, but it passed anyway. When she came in as mayor, she passed the ordinance which brought her salary down to $61,200. But that may not actually have taken effect, and Council-mandated raises brought her actual salary up to $68,000.” She cut the salary. It’s true that subsequenty, cost-of-living and other raises brought it back up. But she clearly took a cut which she initiated. Not a lie. Lie vs. Total Score: 5-10. I’m going to stop here, unless someone believes that the remainder of the “lies list” will produce a much different ratio. Now, don’t get me wrong… 50% lies is an abysmal ratio to find in a collection of statements. At the same time, the claim that the vast majority are clearcut is… well, let’s put it thsi way. If Palin had made that claim about that list, it would BE on that list. ---
**Author:** ![MPB\_in\_Salt\_Lake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c0e974/32.png) [@MPB\_in\_Salt\_Lake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MPB_in_Salt_Lake)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/53 "2009-11-16T00:46:36Z")
> [@DoctorJ](#): > > If I had to choose between reading this book and shoving it up my ass, I wouldn’t even stop to ask for some K-Y. > > The sooner we stop taking her seriously, the better. If the book is to be shoved up anyones ass, (buttered or dry) it should be John McCain’s, for inflicting Sarah Palin on the rest of us, all because he wanted to get his wrinkled mitts and shriveled member in her gaping, stretched-out poozle… (And I am somewhat serious—I fully believe that McCain, a serial adulterer, was actually hopeful that he would get to tapp Palin’s ass if he brought her on the ticket. I realize that there was more to her nomination than just the pathetic, senile fantasy of an old letcher like John McCain, but I am convinced that he was sexually smitten by Sarah Palin, and that it played a significant part in his ill concieved decision) I would also bet some serious $$$ that he was indeed fucking the 40-something year old bonde lobbiest whose relationship with McCain was hushed up early on in his campaign. I dont completely blame him, what with that cryptkeeper ex-junkie wife of his, but he clearly is drawn to older, ex-cheerleader types, and former glamour girls with some serious ruff-trade milage on them. What kills me though, is that while I truly believe all of the above, I STILL cant help but respect John McCain for his service to his country, if not as a politician then certainly as a member of the military and as a POW. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/54 "2009-11-16T18:57:26Z")
WSJ (now a Murdoch owned right wing tabloid) has a soft as butter [“overview”](http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/11/13/palins-book-the-overview/) of the book on its website. They don’t bother to comment on factual accuracy. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/55 "2009-11-16T19:37:50Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > … I wholeheartedly agree that she was unfairly smeared. The word “smeared” connotes unfairness by definition. But I agree that the criticism of her was not remotely fair. The stuff about her family was mostly garbage, that was unfair. The stuff about her character also did not hit hard enough to be truly fair. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/56 "2009-11-16T19:42:09Z")
What stuff about her family? What exactly are these attacks on her family that I keep hearing about? I haven’t seen them. ---
**Author:** ![Chefguy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chefguy/32/138_2.png) [@Chefguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chefguy)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/57 "2009-11-16T19:53:16Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Palin lied when she denied that Wasilla’s police chief and librarian had been fired; in fact, both were given letters of termination the previous day. I’m quoting a quote you quoted, for brevity’s sake. I don’t know if she fired them or not, but I do know her public works director (a friend of mine, and a Republican) flat out quit rather than work for her. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/58 "2009-11-17T00:35:44Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > What stuff about her family? What exactly are these attacks on her family that I keep hearing about? I haven’t seen them. On people’s blogs and such. You’re right, though, that little of the family silliness really got into the mainstream media. ---
**Author:** ![MPB\_in\_Salt\_Lake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c0e974/32.png) [@MPB\_in\_Salt\_Lake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MPB_in_Salt_Lake)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/59 "2009-11-17T01:01:27Z")
I just heard on NBC Nightly News that 60% of American voters recently polled dont think that Sarah Palin is qualified to be President. That means that there is a sizeable population who must feel that she IS qualified. I realise that it dosent necessarily mean that the remaining 40% feel that way, but it has to (I would guess) make at least 20% of voters be OK with a Palin Presidency… Does this blow anybody else away, that anyone, (other than a tiny minority of fringe partisans) would actually deem Palin a worthy prospect for POTUS? ---
**Author:** ![TWDuke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@TWDuke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TWDuke)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521/60 "2009-11-17T01:10:49Z")
> [@MPB\_in\_Salt\_Lake](#): > > That means that there is a sizeable population who must feel that she IS qualified. Often when this question comes up, some pedant will respond to the effect that of course she’s qualified, she’s a natural-born citizen who’s over 35. Although the percentage of deliberately obtuse pedants is surely lower in the general population than among SDMB posters, it is probably greater than 0. > [@](#): > > I realise that it dosent necessarily mean that the remaining 40% feel that way, but it has to (I would guess) make at least 20% of voters be OK with a Palin Presidency. Anywhere between 0 and 40 percent of voters may have responded “no opinion.” You can’t just split the difference and take it as a meaningful result. Besides, we don’t know what the poll question really was (“Would Sarah Palin make a good president?” is much different from “Does Sarah Palin meet the minimum qualifications to run for the presidency?”). We also don’t know who the respondents were. There is no such thing as a purely random selection, but some surveys are better randomized than others. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sarah-palins-book/517521.md?page=4)