GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Sorry, Mr. Axelrod, Mrs. Palin has been far more scrutinized than Mr. Obama

by

As I pointed out in a post earlier today, when on John King’s CNN show yesterday, Obama strategist David Axelrod offered up this whopper, “This president was scrutinized, more perhaps than any candidate ever had been.”  Perhaps clueless about the latest Sarah Palin-inspired media frenzy, King chose not to challenge the Democrat on his assertion.

Perhaps, Mr. King should join me in subscribing to the Wall Street Journal’s Political Diary.  Yesterday, in that e-newsletter, John Fund, commenting on said frenzy asked us to

Contrast this with the level of interest that reporters have shown in Barack Obama’s lack of a paper trail during the 2008 campaign and afterwards. No, I’m not talking about the issue of his birth certificate. I am thinking of his college records and papers; his application to the Illinois bar to become a lawyer; his complete list of clients while he was in private practice; and his records from his service in the Illinois State Senate. Almost none of this has been released in whole or in part by Mr. Obama, and requests have been airily dismissed.

And then there are Mr. Obama’s longtime associations with very left-wing political figures and foundations. With the exception of journalist Stanley Kurtz, author of a richly documented new book called “Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism,” almost no one has been interested in those ties.

Do hope Mr. King asks Mr. Axelrod about this missing paper trail and these associations the next time he has him on CNN (and he does seem to be a frequent quest on that network).  In the meanwhile, it would be nice if other reporters at CNN started subjecting the incumbent to the same sort of scrutiny it subjects Mrs. Palin.

FROM THE COMMENTS:  The Griper may not “like to use this type of argument but” remains “certain that in this case if Sarah Palin were a liberal and the right held her up to this scrutiny there’d be accusations of sexual prejudice flying all over the nation.”  Indeed.

UPDATE:  Ann Althouse offers some perspective on the nature of the scrutiny the media have made into Mrs. Palin’s affairs:

In the run up to the receipt of the boxes of xeroxes, air time was devoted to speculating about what might be in those emails. Most notable — it’s in the middle of the “Daily Show” montage — was the suspicion that the governor’s husband was secretly running the show, pulling the strings. (You know, the shameful sexism.) But there was absolutely nothing that looked at all like that. Maybe there’s another montage that could be made of these reporters spelling out clearly what was disproved by the emails. But I think what’s they did was dribble out statements like “no smoking gun yet” — seemingly expecting that we’d gradually lose interest and move on to something else.

Read the whole thing.   Via Instapundit.

Comments

  5. Amazing. They look you in the eye and explain, in a tone of absolute Gospel truth, that up is down and black is white.

    The media has done everything to Palin short of a colonoscopy(and I’m pretty sure the Times is considering it), while Obama could rape a kitten on worldwide television and the press would suddenly find the 2nd Annual Lithuanian Spelling Bee so completely mesmerizing that nothing else would make the news.

    Yet, BO has been scrutinized more than ANYBODY. Really. And if you disagree, you’re a…what?

  7. i don’t like to use this type of argument but i am certain that in this case if Sarah Palin were a liberal and the right held her up to this scrutiny there’d be accusations of sexual prejudice flying all over the nation. this alone would show that their accusation of prejudice against the president are unfounded.

  10. It’s not so much a missing paper trail on Obama (marks, applications etc) but one that is being guarded by a pile of lawyers. I gather that the fees that Obama (or someone) has paid out so far to block requests for this information has exceeded one million dollars. Sure sounds like he’s trying to hide something. I’d also like to know where the million came from. If he took if from canpaign donations I think that’s a federal offense. If someone paid for it then that sounds similar to the Edwards charges of illegal campaign contributions. The rationale is certainly the same.

  11. SCR, as I recall, it was north of a million just to fight court challenges regarding his birth certificate. Covering up everything else probably costs more. Interestingly, his history is covered up by the same who whined, pissed & moaned for eight years about Bush’s background. Which, coincidentally, are the same people who said that Clinton’s lack of military service didn’t matter.

  12. The notion that Obama has faced harsh scrutiny from the mainstream media is so spectacularly untrue that just implying it makes the very fabric of reality crumble a little.

  15. TnnsNE1

    Maybe that’s why Levi thinks President Obama’s brilliant and Sarah Palin’s a dunce…

    They both write above his educational level.

  16. Has anyone else noticed the absence of the lefty loonies? The local newspaper in my area (Maine) has had a reduction in 2 things in the last few months : financial news stories and lefty loonies praising every move President Obama makes. Is this a trend?

  17. What I found amusing about the Readability Score story on Gov. Palin, is that if one actually reads all the way through it, you come to this little gem:

    “It turns out Palin’s writing skills are still better than most educated Americans. Global Language Monitor gave Palin’s emails a score of 8.2, which actually exceeds that of most chief executives.”

    Hmmm….in their zeal to paint her as a a barely-literate rube, they reveal she writes better than most chief-executives (along with ‘most educated Americans’).

    It’s like the media and the left are replaying the classic Simpsons scene with Sideshow Bob stepping on the rake over and over and over and over and over…..