Scum and villainy: Republicans already throwing Palin under the bus.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@DrDeth

Is Palestine a counrty or a state? How about Kurdistan? Actually, there is a subtle difference between a country or a state. Unless you think she thought a US State, which is highly doubtful, and to beleive that I’d have to see a transcript of the comment and in context.

Actually, according to Carl Cameron, what she asked was whether South Africa was the southern part of the “country of Africa” or a separate country all together.

Cameron also specifically said that sghe could not name what countries were in North America, not just what was in NAFTA. and that she didn’t understand basic civics (e.g. the different branches and functions of government).

Now it may be that this is all simple ignorance on her part, not innate intellectual deficiency, but I see it as a distinction without a difference. That level of ignorance in a person applying to be the most powrful person on the world is unacceptable.

[Hostile_Dialect]

@DrDeth

Is Palestine a counrty or a state? How about Kurdistan? Actually, there is a subtle difference between a country or a state. Unless you think she thought a US State, which is highly doubtful, and to beleive that I’d have to see a transcript of the comment and in context.

That’s not what I meant and you know it. “State” was my word for “entity smaller than a country”, not her word. “Region” would have been a better way to paraphrase the general idea.

[mhendo]

@bengangmo

While I am not a journalist I am a Public Relations Director - I ahve always considered “off the record” to be based on trust rather than a legal requirement. If a journalist spills an off the record comment then obviously they will never be trusted again - but the “victim” would have little recourse.

There is a thread somewhere here that backs this up…

Right.

I never suggested it was a legal requirement, only an ethical one. A journalist won’t be charged with a crime for breaking the “off the record” promise, but will be treated like a pariah.

[Tuckerfan]

@mhendo

Right.

I never suggested it was a legal requirement, only an ethical one. A journalist won’t be charged with a crime for breaking the “off the record” promise, but will be treated like a pariah.

IIRC, they, and the news organization they work for can be subjected to civil suits, however.

[elucidator]

Picked this up over at Atrios’ blog, an excerpt from Cambell Brown, pretty well said.

Tonight the scape-goating of Sarah Palin. Whatever you may have thought about John McCain’s running mate… about whether she was qualified, prepared or experienced enough for the job… try if you can to put all of that aside for just a moment. Because Sarah Palin is who she is. She did not become measurably more intelligent or measurably less intelligent during this campaign. Remember, she was only part of the campaign for a matter of nine weeks. Sarah Palin is who she is.

Which is why I find it so stunning that the very people who introduced us to Sarah Palin… who told us she would make a great Vice President… have now turned on her with a vengeance. They are the top advisors to John McCain’s failed campaign and they are desperate right now to find someone to blame for their long long list of mistakes. They have been launching grenades at Palin and her supporters… some of their allegations we at CNN have found to be patently false. You will hear people say “this is what always happens with a losing campaign”… and hopefully, this is the last time we will be talking about these people. But what they have done just in the last few days to save their own skins is worth a final comment.

To those top McCain advisors who leaked the little story about seeing Sarah Palin in a towel. To those who called her and her family “Wasilla Hillbillies” while using her to stoke class warfare with redmeat speeches and an anti-elitist message. To those who claim she didn’t know Africa was a continent. To those McCain aides who say she is the reason they lost this election… can I please remind you of one thing: you picked her.

You are the ones who supposedly vetted her, and then told the American people she was qualified for the job. You are the ones who after meeting her a couple of times, told us she was ready to be just one heartbeat away from the Presidency. If even half of what you say NOW is true, then boy, did you try to sell the American people a bill of goods. If Sarah Palin is the reason some voters chose Barack Obama, that is no one’s fault but your own. John McCain, as he so graciously said himself the other night, lost this election. He lost it with your help, your advice, your guidance, and yes, your running mate recommendations. And that is crystal clear to everyone, no matter how hard you try to blame Sarah Palin or anyone else.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

Well said indeed.

[mhendo]

Yeah, i watched that clip online a little while ago. It really was quite apropos.

[Frank]

@DrDeth

I have always considered Central America and the Carrib. to be outside what I consider NA, and by one def , wiki agrees with me "In English, North America is often used to refer to the United States and Canada exclusively.[21] Alternatively, usage may include Mexico[22] (as with North American Free Trade Agreement) and other entities.[23] "

Geographically, everything north of South America is part of the North American continent. Look at it coming from the other side: Central America, Mexico, the Carribean, St. Pierre & Miquelon, and Greenland are certainly not part of South America. Any definition of North America that includes only the U.S. and Canada is so exclusive as to be useless.

[Hostile_Dialect]

“North America” does not necessarily contrast with South America, but can contrast with Latin America or a combination of Central America and South America. I wouldn’t say that being unable to define North America is a crime–there are several different definitions for different contexts and different purposes. But to be unable to list the members of NAFTA is just incredible. I mean, I was seven years old when NAFTA came into existence, and I wouldn’t have to think about the answer.

[Steve_MB]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

Cameron also specifically said that sghe could not name what countries were in North America

Hey, at least she knew that North America is a continent, not a country.

[Muffin]

@Steve_MB

Hey, at least she knew that North America is a continent, not a country.

That’s only because she has supported her husband’s party that has proposed joining Canada.

[Bricker]

So… a couple of “well said” responses for Campbell Brown’s comments, and then we go back to commenting on the Palin allegations as if they were all true… despite Brown’s statement that CNN had found some to “be patently false.”

This reminds me of a concept that I was reminded of with the passing of Michael Chrichton – the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect.

@Michael Crichton

Media carries with it a credibility that is totally undeserved. You have all experienced this, in what I call the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. (I call it by this name because I once discussed it with Murray Gell-Mann, and by dropping a famous name I imply greater importance to myself, and to the effect, than it would otherwise have.)

Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect works as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward-reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them.

In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story-and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read with renewed interest as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about far-off Palestine than it was about the story you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.

That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I’d point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all.

But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper. When, in fact, it almost certainly isn’t. The only possible explanation for our behavior is amnesia.

[Fish]

We are left with few conclusions, Bricker.

Either FOX News was lying when it said Palin was qualified, or they’re lying now. Neither one of them says anything complimentary about FOX as a genuine news source; either way, it’s a partisan hack job by a biased media source.

I can be grateful that Palin wasn’t elected even if the FOX stories are false, because I don’t want to go through four years of FOX News hatchet jobs on her.

[jayjay]

You do realize that there are going to be four (or, please God, eight) years of Fox News hatchet jobs on Obama, anyway, right? I can’t imagine that anyone except a triumphant McCain administration was going to get away with multiple years of a Fox News love-in.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Bricker

So… a couple of “well said” responses for Campbell Brown’s comments, and then we go back to commenting on the Palin allegations as if they were all true… despite Brown’s statement that CNN had found some to “be patently false.”

While I’ll withhold judgment on the veracity of the anti-Palin story for now, I note with some amusement that CNN has found some of the allegations to be “patently false” but not bothered to tell us which ones.

I’m sure that some of this stuff is campaign staffers playing the blame game… but where there’s smoke, there’s probably at least some embers.

[Steve_MB]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

While I’ll withhold judgment on the veracity of the anti-Palin story for now, I note with some amusement that CNN has found some of the allegations to be “patently false” but not bothered to tell us which ones.

I’d guess that the Africa thing is bogus (at most, she may have had a momentary brain glitch comparable to “57 states” or “my fellow prisoners”), the wardrobe thing is credible (we already have documentation of the $150k spending spree from campaign financial reports), and the rest are undetermined.

[DrDeth]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

Actually, according to Carl Cameron, what she asked was whether South Africa was the southern part of the “country of Africa” or a separate country all together.

Cameron also specifically said that sghe could not name what countries were in North America, not just what was in NAFTA. and that she didn’t understand basic civics (e.g. the different branches and functions of government).

Now it may be that this is all simple ignorance on her part, not innate intellectual deficiency, but I see it as a distinction without a difference. That level of ignorance in a person applying to be the most powrful person on the world is unacceptable.

But Cameron heard none of that :

Opinion: What Sarah Palin didn't know, as reported by Fox's Carl Cameron

"Cameron, the Fox beat reporter for the Republican presidential ticket, said *he had been told by unnamed sources *-- and on the condition he not report the details during the campaign – that Palin could not name all of the countries that are part of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

He did not mention which one (or ones) she whiffed on, but there are only three: Canada, the U.S. and Mexico.

Nor, according to Cameron, was Palin aware that Africa is a continent. "
Thus if Cameron stated “Cameron also specifically said that sghe could not name what countries were in North America”, then he’s lying. The best he could do is “somebody told me that…”

So, it’s unsubstanciated and out of context gossip, report 2nd or 3rd hand. Wortless hit piece. Hey, someone told me that Obama was a secret Muslim. It’s absolutely true- someone did tell me that. Does it make it true that Obam is a secret Muslim? Or did someone tell me a lie?

Others in the Palin campiagn have claimed that she made no such errors, that either Cameron is a liar, or that his “mystery source” is.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/sharon-hughes/2008/11/06/fox-news-carl-cameron-takes-low-road-palin
*In failing to mention the names of the accusers, or input from staffers who disagree with the rumors, Cameron failed the ‘fair and balanced’ creed of FOX News. Plus Cameron’s somewhat fevered manner in repeating the rumors, was not only surprising, but showed his lack of objectivity.

If I could be candid for a moment: Inside fighting is all to common in campaigns, I know. When my husband, Duane, ran for U.S. Congress and lost the last time we experienced the same thing from one person on his staff who, instead of pulling 100% with the candidate, turned and created dissent in the camp. The things said were untrue, and were the fruit of those who couldn’t handle losing well. How do we know that this is not what is happening with these few (how many are they? we don’t know, could be one instigator) McCain staffers? *

I have Googled News “Carl Cameron palin” and I have got many variations of the "Africa and "North American " gaffes. This seems to be the original:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/national/stories/DN-mccainpalin_07pol.ART.State.Edition1.4aac462.html

Carl Cameron reported that campaign sources told him Ms. Palin had resisted coaching before her faltering Katie Couric interviews; did not understand that Africa was a continent rather than a country; and could not name the three nations that are part of the North American Free Trade Agreement – the United States, Canada and Mexico.

In both case, the gaffe is considerable different that what you report.

Sorry, Cameron is unreliably and his source is worthless. Not only is it 2nd or 3rd hand, it’s unverified and taken out of context. Verification is key and so is context.
And like I said- few if anyone could name “all of the countries in North America”, depending on your definition of "North America’ and “country”.

That being said, I have little doubt I could beat Gov Palin in a game of “international geography trivia”:D, it hardly seems to be her forte.

[DrDeth]

@Frank

Geographically, everything north of South America is part of the North American continent. Look at it coming from the other side: Central America, Mexico, the Carribean, St. Pierre & Miquelon, and Greenland are certainly not part of South America. Any definition of North America that includes only the U.S. and Canada is so exclusive as to be useless.

I see that as a logical scientific definition, but if so, few could name 'all the countries of North America". I love Geotrivia, but I know I could not do it.

It seems that what was reported- 3rd hand, unverified and out of context was " (Palin)could not name the three nations that are part of the North American Free Trade Agreement" which is quite a bit different than naming all the nations in North America.

[Skald_the_Rhymer]

@DrDeth

And Greenland is historically more part of Europe.

I think you’re confusing Greenland with Iceland.

[jayjay]

@Skald_the_Rhymer

I think you’re confusing Greenland with Iceland.

Actually, Greenland is the Danish equivalent of a Commonwealth country. Queen Margrethe II of Denmark is the official head-of-state, with a crown-appointed governor-general (called the Rigsombudsmand). But they elect their own parliament and PM.