Rachel Maddow on Sarah Palin
You know I can't resist anything Maddow related.
Thanks to Heather for the link.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Rachel Maddow on Sarah Palin.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/10368
I saw the whole interview, and Maddow completely distorts it. I've really lost respect for her as a journalist.
Palin repeatedly said that the media needs to check anonymous sources before reporting on them, which I think is pretty logical.
Also, Palin gives a great description of the double standard for men and women in politics, and the media's role in it. See the whole interview to make up your mind.
guerillawomentn.blogspot.com
I was annoyed too that barely anyone is showing the parts of the interview where she discusses sexism and double standards. It doesn't surprise me at all that people like Maddow and Olbermann are hand-picking only the easiest parts of the interview to make fun of, but it is disappointing nonetheless.
Liberals and conservatives both are ok with double standards as long as it helps their side...
Dude...I've seen discussions of the sexism thing. Palin defines sexism as anything that hurts HER personally, not necessarily women in general. In fact, she seems bang alongside hurting women, if it means she can get ahead.
Did you watch the parts of the interview where Palin discusses sexism? You might want to before telling us what her definition of sexism is.
I've heard more Obama supporters call Hillary a cunt than I've ever heard Republicans. And it was democrats walking around in "Palin is a Cunt" t-shirts.
But hey, Obama won, and the ends justify the means right?
Let's be sure to continue to talk to death Palin's wardrobe, the fact that she talked to campaign staff in a towel, and continue the unsubstantiated rumors that she is an idiot that doesn't know Africa is a continent, because they are really pressing matters. And the rumors must be true anyways, right? Because beauty queens are dumb, republicans are dumber, and interviewing skills are the most accurate indicator of intelligence. But seriously, who cares if the rumors are true or if there is something wrong about tearing a politician down because of her wardrobe rather than because of her politics? Anything that keeps democrats in power...
I like how 4 people disliked my comment but not one of them responded to it. Stay classy, feministing.
Wow, I didn't know that people reading Feministing owed you comments.
I just don't like the dislike function. And say so often.
In the same thread, even.
I agree, the function is becoming stupid. It's like how car horns are meant to warn people of danger but instead used to express road rage and thus use deviates from the original purpose. I thought this function might come in useful but I totally agree we should get rid of it.
...the like/dislike function is intended, as the name suggests, to mark comments that people like or dislike. People are using it to mark comments that they like or dislike. I do not see how this is a perversion of its original intention.
It *would* be false to say that Keith and Rachel are unbiased news sources, especially on the topic of Sarah Palin.
However, I've seen the whole interview, and it was admittedly quite awkward, even during the parts where she mentions sexism and the double standards. I can totally see where Sarah's coming from about the clothing-- I had suspected as much when the news first started reporting the costs.
But it must be said that Palin didn't really know what she was doing, or what she was saying, and that was a MAJOR problem during her entire campaign! We all pity her. She was unprepared and obviously under-informed.
I saw the whole interview, and Maddow completely distorts it. I've really lost respect for her as a journalist.
Good thing she's a commentator rather than a journalist, then, eh?
While the interview may have indeed been a little awkward and Maddow may be making good points about it, if you haven't actually seen the interview it does look a little like Maddow deliberately picks out bits that make her look bad. It annoys me when people do this, and this goes for Jon Stewart and Michael Moore too, although I do respect and enjoy Stewart, Moore and Maddow. It's just too easy for people to dismiss.
While I recognise (as does Maddow) that there is a double standard for women in the media, I do not think that is what happened here, and I also do not think Maddow distorted the interview.
Speaking as a woman who did not vote for Senator Clinton (whom I respect, but I do not care for her stance on the war, among other issues), I do not feel like Sarah Palin has received the treatment she has on account of her gender. I did not vote for the McCain/Palin ticket because their plans and ideas are anathema to my life plans and ideas, so it doesn't matter if one of them is a woman, too.
Maddow pointed out some of the various non sequiturs in Palin's interview because they were prevalent despite Palin doing this interview on her own terms. In short, it does not take media bias in order for her to not make sense. This does not happen to Tammy Baldwin, Senator Clinton, Olympia Dukakis and Kay Bailey Hutchison because they are all capable of finding coherent sentences with two hands and a flashlight. Rachel Maddow mocks Palin because the latter makes it easy, not because she's a girl.
I like Maddow, too, but I've become extremely uncomfortable with the cheap personal shots at Palin. Maybe my discomfort is tied to some lingering resentments about the way Clinton was treated by fauxgressives during the primaries, but still, in this case and in others it seems to me that people on "our" side are taking a bit too much delight in stomping all over Palin, to the point where I think they're making misrepresenting her into a sport. I think Maddow's wrong, here.
...the sources are anonymous to readers, not to the reporters or the fact-checking bureaus. They keep the sources' anonymity so the reporters can continue to tap their source, and so their source doesn't get fired.
But I do think that anonymous sources put an extra burden on the press to do at least some minimal fact-checking before "reporting." Spreading rumors is NOT journalism. I agree 100% with Palin when she said that. Talking about a woman being a "diva" is cattiness, not journalism. As a feminist, I'm offended.
I'm as liberal as they get, but I still think that journalists have a duty to report the news, not gossip and blind parroting of anonymous sources. The New York Times has been the worst offender.
I competely agree. All these rumors would be perfect for Perez Hilton. But it seems like journalists realize Perez Hilton is their competitor because more people visit his sight than watch their shows and read their papers, so they are giving the people what they want. GOSSIP.
Oops, site, not sight
Ugh...now that the election is over Sarah Palin is on the list of people I never want to hear about again, right next to Joe the Plumber.
Spider, I don't give a crap how Palin defines "feminism" and I'm a little interested but not a lot in what she claims are sexist attacks against her. My concern is with how I perceive the attacks against her and with her general treatment by the soi-disant "progressive" community, and that's where I think there's a problem.
I second knitaclaw.
I'm unclear how this performance (and yes, I saw the entire interview BEFORE I saw Maddow's take on it) differs in any way from the abysmal performance she had in her interview with Katie Couric. I'm one who believes that speech reflects thought process and this woman's thought process appears to be a rambling incoherent mess.
Bottom line to me is that Sarah Palin refuses to take any responsibility for the failure of the Republican ticket. She jumped into a game where she didn't understand the rules, and then she made some idiot, albeit predictable gaffes (which is all I think the clothing fiasco was). She just wants it to go away. She wants it to go away on her terms and in a light that makes her look good. You don't get everything you want, babe.
My final take on Palin is I can't stand people who refuse to take personal responsibility and Sarah Palin is mayor of Notmyfaultville.
I disagree that Palin refused to take any responsibility for the Republican ticket's failure. Didn't she publicly apologize saying that if she cost McCain even one vote, she was sorry?
There are anonymous rumors about her all over the news and internet, and she wanted to respond to them. I think that is competely understandable, even if she is an evil republican.
And as an inarticulate dork, I completely disagree that speech necessarily reflects thought process. No matter how prepared I am for class, if I get called on and asked an unexpected question, I sound like a complete idiot.
And I completely expect that I'll be less successful than my inarticulate dork male-counterparts because it is a lot easier for someone to say that a successful woman is an idiot and get away with it than it is to say the same about a successful man.
Agreed. I consider myself pretty intelligent but I can be *very* inarticulate at times. This usually happens not because my thought process is rambling but because 1000 thoughts and analyses come into my head at once and form kind of a bottleneck when it comes to actually verbalising them. I'm not a quick thinker AT ALL, I need to take time to stew something over and make sense of its nuances, but when I do really think something over I can express it very well. This is why I am very strong at writing academic essays but not so hot on my verbal communication. Speech patterns and thought processes are nothing to do with each other in most people's cases.
It's not just how she talks, though she has a, shall we say, unique way of constructing sentences.
It's that she doesn't know the description of the VP post she was applying for. It's that she can't give an answer to any question that's not in her talking points. (Yeah, who would have ever thought that she might need to have heard of some Supreme Court cases or some newspapers.)
The New York Times isn't in the business of reporting "anonymous rumors".
I disagree that she has taken any responsibility for her part in that losing ticket. Taking responsibility would be saying "I DID cost John McCain votes and for that I am sorry." But don't get me wrong. John McCain was the big loser here.
Furthermore, I don't think Palin is evil. Woefully unprepared for the national stage, sure. Way the heck out of her league, absolutely. But she isn't evil. Neither do I think Republicans are evil. I know a lot of intelligent, thoughtful, empathetic Republicans with whom I respectfully disagree.
Sarah Palin is trying to manipulate her public image (read that: save her own ass) by blaming someone else. The people who said awful, catty things about her are trying to do the same. The story here is not who's at fault. The story here is a campaign that unraveled before our eyes. Maddow is right. Reporters are doing their job and reporting the news. They are doing their job and getting her response to the accusations, which were anonymous in the respect that the person who fed them this information declined to be identified in print. Anonymous sources are not "unvetted" sources. It's not like they asked some random person standing outside McCain headquarters about Palin and then called that person "someone close to the campaign". There is nothing unprofessional or improper about asking for her response to statements made by her former handlers. If she doesn't like it the way the news media operates, she should remove herself from their radar by getting into a different business. Otherwise, it's a nagging responsibility to deal with reporters. But to imply that reporters who ask her hard, uncomfortable questions aren't doing their jobs......
let's just say, I wouldn't hire her as a reporter on my paper.
I don't think Palin cost McCain votes, so I don't think she should apologize directly for it. I don't think McCain lost independent voters because he picked a VP who was so far right, I think he lost independent voters because HE went so far right. And I think for all the republicans who were turned off of the republican ticket because of Palin, just as many actually got out and voted because Palin "energized the base."
And I think the McCain campaign staffers are trying to save their own asses by throwing Palin under a bus. McCain's campaign was so awful, none of those people should ever be hired on a campaign again. And I think they are making up stories to keep the media spotlight on Palin so the media spotlight won't be on the horrible campaign.
And I'm uncomfortable with the media's reporting on Palin in part because it seems like they are just having fun gossiping rather than reporting a story. They aren't just reporting that the McCain campaign is unraveling, they are reveling in Palin gossip. And I think the public eats up gossip so much more when it is about women that I think the entire thing is pathetic.
It bothers me that the anonymous campaigners so easily threw the spotlight on Palin and away from themselves. They were easily able to manipulate the media in that way because the media loves to gossip about women and because it is so easy to convince people that a successful woman doesn't know Africa is a continent. Do you ACTUALLY believe that she didn't know Africa was a contitent, because I don't believe that. I think I heard that exact rumor in high school from a guy about his ex-girlfriend. I didn't believe dumb gossip in high school either.
Bah, if I'd edited that comment before posting, I wouldn't have used the word "easily" as much. See inarticulate comment above....
"Didn't she publicly apologize saying that if she cost McCain even one vote, she was sorry?"
There's a world of difference between that and "I cost John McCain votes, and I'm sorry."
I understand your point. I responded to a similar one above.
please, some feminists here are getting their feathers ruffled over nothing.
Sarah Palin is EASY to mock because quite frankly, she is so unbelievably stupid, dangerous, evil and backward, not because she's a woman.
I am happy calling her names all day and making fun of her, she's in the same league as morons such as George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Karl Rove.
oh yeah and I also call those males degrading names, too.
Equal Offenders Opportunity for everybody!
Stupidity knows now gender boundaries. It's not unfeminist to call someone out for being an idiot. At most, it's impolite. I characterize her as the same kind of intellectually incurious imbecile as George W. Bush. They're the kind of people who'd rather consult god than read a book or a newspaper. She'd rather spend her time degrading research that she couldn't begin to comprehend (Her fruit-fly gaffe) than trying to stretch her mental capabilities and learn something new.
What I took from this post is that Palin blames the mean big city media for *her* ignorance and her gaffes. There's only so much that you can blame on the media and on sexism.
Moxie, it's not that she's being called for being an idiot, at least as far as I'm concerned. (I'd dispute that she's an idiot, though - she's very, very badly educated and she lacks intellectual engagement, but I think she's actually pretty smart and I've been following Alaska politics pretty closely for quite awhile). But that's really neither here nor there. I'm more concerned with the quality of the attention she's receiving and the fact that that attention tends to be personal rather than policy-driven.
Kathy G over at the G Spot has posted that there's something about Palin that gets under her skin - i.e. that it's a personal reaction - and she's posted about Sarah Palin the person as opposed to being focused on Sarah Palin's politics. Digby's done pretty much the same thing.
Megan McArdle, believe it or not, posted one of the smartest things on race and racism I've seen in the blogosphere. Among other things she wrote that as far as she knows she doesn't discriminate and she doesn't think that anybody she knows discriminates, and yet it's still the case that African-Americans get fewer job offers than whites and make less money for the same job, so *something* is going on. The stuff about Palin has been so vituperative and personal and relentless that I find it difficult not to wonder if Palin's ultra-conservative politics and anti-intellectualism aren't being used to leverage some deeper, somewhat more elusive problems around women in the public sphere.
"The stuff about Palin has been so vituperative and personal and relentless that I find it difficult not to wonder if Palin's ultra-conservative politics and anti-intellectualism aren't being used to leverage some deeper, somewhat more elusive problems around women in the public sphere."
um, yeah. Many of us hate her because she's stupid, dangerous, racist, homophobic, SEXIST, and evil. None of us know her personally, but we know enough of what she did in her office as a mayor in Wasilla, to make us hate her with pure venom.
stop blaming it on her being a woman.
Thank you! Are these people freepers or what? I can't tell sometimes.
What does freepers mean?
Never mind, looked it up. So if anyone calls out the media for sexism as it relates to a republican, they themselves are a republican?
I have to say that this site, its staff, and its community seem to find sexism in all facets of our society, even when I sometimes don't.
But sexism against republicans? Impossible!
I think you need to re-read what freeper means again. It seems people like you need to read things over and over again until there’s any hope of something---anything---sinking in.
Have a nice day, freeper.
Melinda: "I'm more concerned with the quality of the attention she's receiving and the fact that that attention tends to be personal rather than policy-driven."
I can see where you're coming from, but because she's based so much of her "platform," if you will, on her personality and personal issues, that's what is talked about. We're talking about the clothes because she said in every stump speech that she's just a hockey mom that shops at thrift stores. She claimed that she and her husband have struggled with money and paying the bills, so she knows what it's like for the average American who is losing her/his house because they can't pay the mortgage. She claimed that she took on "big oil" in Alaska. Meanwhile, she (and/or the campaign) spent upwards of 150k on clothes, she and her husband are worth more than $1 million, and her husband works for BP.
It's this kind of hypocrisy (amongst many others) that makes her personal life ripe for the picking. In reality, she has very few professional accomplishments (actual results or legislation, rather than just being mayor or governor), so she couldn't run on those. I'm not being sexist. Just like I'm not being racist when I say that I'm sure that Obama will let us down on some things in the coming years.
It isn't really even the issue whether she is stupid/evil or not, but that she had no business running for VP of the U.S. I mean, really, that's what we're talking about.
I can't fault people for focusing on Palin's personal idiosyncrasies rather than her policies because her personality was the basis of her campaigning. It was all "I'm a Hockey Mom!" "I'm Folksy!" "PitBull! Lipstick!" "Maverick!""Look at my daughter PERSONAL CHOICE to have her baby!"
Playing up how Palin, as a person, was just like everybody else and the GOP deperately wanted people to identify with her, was her primary function. She barely mentioned her policies outside of something like the VP Debate.
You know, I am going to kinda miss Sarah Palin. At least for the lols.
Christ-all-mighty! WTF? A lot of you sound like whiney freepers! Yuck!
Sara Palin is an ignoramus---plain and simple. She might possibly even be a moron! There’s no amount of contextual editing that can make these stand-alone comments look even half-way intelligent.
I thought the interview was quite funny.
If you creampuffs don’t like her style, go read or listen to David Frum. He agrees with you about Maddow---you’d be best buds.
Talk about not knowing which side yer bread is buttered on. Talk about shooting yerself in the foot. Geez!
kurd55, I think that if you're racist, sexist, classist, homophobic, etc. you're not really progressive. One of the things that's been upsetting to me during this campaign is the extent to which people who claim to be progressive have been saying some pretty problematic things, things that are partisan rather than progressive. I have very little investment in the Democratic Party, and was unhappy enough with the way that the primaries went that I changed my voter registration to the Working Families Party. Pretty early on someone described many Obama volunteers as behaving like Young Republicans and I think you're continuing to do that.
Palin's not evil. She's not a moron. She's not even stupid. She's just a person who's wrong about a bunch of stuff. To the extent that anybody here sounds like Freepers it's the people trying to demonize Palin, attacking her as a person rather than keeping the focus on her policy positions. The Republicans are wrong on policy but they're also wrong in how they conduct campaigns, relying on vicious Atwater/Rove smear tactics. Not sure why you'd want to do the same thing.
"kurd55, I think that if you're racist, sexist, classist, homophobic, etc. you're not really progressive."
Heh, heh. REACTIONARY much?
Again, you and David Frum are in symbiosis when it comes to Maddow.
It's just a fact.
By the way, Palin IS evil in my book, as well as being an ignoramus.
Later, freeper.
Wow, well if you say "It's just a fact," it must be a fact. No argument there.
I generally think when people respond to other people's argument with words like freeper, idiot, evil, ignoramus, it's a fact because I say so, etc, they have really well thought out arguments.
Thanks for sharing yours.
Look up Frum and Maddow on YouTube.
See for yerself, freeper.
Of course, freepers are known to suffer from aphasia.
And for that: my deepest sympathies.
Melinda, what word would you use to describe someone who is "wrong about a bunch of stuff"? Considering the rate at which Palin is wrong, the wide variety of topics on which she is wrong, and the sheer magnitude cognitive dissonance on her part about her wrongness, I might have to go with idiot. It's the same word I use for Bush.
And you know what? That woman, Sarah Palin, would have supported an amendment to the Constitution stating that I cannot get married to my fiancée. She would legislate my life and my choices. She would make a law to make me permanently a second-class citizen. What word would you use, if not evil?
Saying she is stupid is not sexist. Intensely disliking her because she stands loudly against everything I hold dear is not sexist. Assholes making blow-up dolls of her is sexist. Go yell at them.
I'll add my voice to the people who disagree that Palin-- in this instance, at least, because she has been faced with a lot of sexist BS, I won't argue that-- is being treated unfairly by Maddow in this clip.
I've seen the source interview; Palin rambles and contradicts herself and generally plays a gigantic game of political 123 NOT IT! trying to make the media/whatever else strikes her fancy responsible for everything that went wrong in the McCain campaign. If a man gave interviews like this, I would be as equally amused and disgusted.
In fact, as to the people saying this criticism is sexist, I actually think to not criticize her would be sexist. The woman is a political trainwreck, and telling people they should be expected to hold back on their criticisms because of her gender is-- IMO-- insanely sexist in and of itself.
I don't have a t.v. so I only see things that are highlighted on blogs and the like.
Is John McCain, the guy at the top of the ticket who allegedly picked Palin, getting the same sort of post-game treatment? I've heard nothing at all.
Knowing that I'm only hearing some things, it just strikes me as being incredibly one-sided. "Anonymous sources" in McCain's campaign versus named sources in Palin's camp. Palin getting mocked while McCain seems to have disappeared. Are there reporters camped outside McCain's house? Are they questioning him on the money spent on the campaign that he run? They were both in this together and it seems only one of them is being attacked in the aftermath.
As I said, though, I only get t.v. news that people highlight, so maybe that's going on and I'm missing it.
I might be wrong, too, but I think it has to do with Gov. Palin calling a press conference and Sen. McCain taking a media spotlight break.
I think Sarah Palin faced a lot of sexism. I also think she was woefully underprepared and ignorant. But this clip is just stupid. I haven't watched any of the other Maddow stuff, but based on this I have no desire to. She's not adding to the debate, either by giving us the news or by providing commentary that is even a little bit insightful. She's just being obnoxious for no reason.
Also, people calling others freepers? Grow up.
Palisades, I think you're probably doing yourself a disservice by not watching Maddow - I'd give her another chance. This is the only thing I've seen of hers that I think is kind of asinine. Other than that I think she's one of the smartest commentators on TV (acknowledging that that's a low bar).
Sarah, I don't think Palin is a political train wreck. She was a train wreck of a vice presidential candidate and I'm curious to see what she does with the experience of having run for national office (that is to say, what lessons she'll have chosen to learn). My general sense is that prominent among the reasons that she was such a crappy candidate is that she was kept on a very short leash by the McCain campaign and that she's not adaptable enough to do a good job campaigning the way they wanted her to. She ran a very competent campaign for governor.
In general I'm not quite sure to make of people who'd never heard of Palin before August insisting to me that she's this or that.
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at, Melinda; are you saying Sarah Palin is a good politician who got trapped in a campaign that didn't allow her to be herself?
Because I disagree with the first part-- not only because of her policies, but because of the Scandal A Day calender that was practically needed to keep up with the stories coming from Alaska-- but perhaps see what you mean in the second.
However, when Sarah Palin apparently was 'herself'? She accused Obama of being a socialist and 'palling around with terrorists'. She showed a horrifying lack of insight and general knowledge. And before someone else says 'Oh but why aren't you slamming McCain too sexism!' I would first say that a) I have indeed judged McCain by his actions and found him highly wanting, and b) McCain is not giving out increasingly incoherent interviews each day where he contradicts himself, shows little-to-no self awareness, and proves that if he had been 'himself' during the campaign he would have frightened me even more than he already did.
Sarah Palin has made sure to keep herself in headlines and the news she so vehemently claims to hate, and John McCain has not. Therefore, I am only in a position to speak about Sarah Palin's actions and not his at this moment in time.
I enjoy and respect Maddow very much (OK, yes I have a woman crush) but, this one felt like overkill and the split screen where she's making faces seemed goofy at best.
I guess my point is that she didn't need to try so hard to discredit Palin, so it felt really overdone. Not her best, but hey, she's allowed one bad one out of gazillion awesome pieces. : )
I live in Alicante, Spain, never saw Rachel Maddow before, but she seems like a THOUGHTFUL, interesting COMMENTATOR.
Aren´t you guys in the USA poised to get rid of one stammering idiot named George Bush? Why are you clinging to ANOTHER ONE, Sarah Palin? Is the transition to literacy too painful, must Sarah fill in the gap? She is like Bush in a bad wig. Make a clean brake, people of America, how lucky you are that you can at this moment.
Palin speaks English like I do, but it is not MY FIRST LANGUAGE.
Palin reminds me of those actors that were ruined when the moving pictures ADDED SOUND.
Off the stage!
I live in Alicante, Spain, never saw Rachel Maddow before, but she seems like a THOUGHTFUL, interesting COMMENTATOR.
Aren´t you guys in the USA poised to get rid of one stammering idiot named George Bush? Why are you clinging to ANOTHER ONE, Sarah Palin? Is the transition to literacy too painful, must Sarah fill in the gap? She is like Bush in a bad wig. Make a clean brake, people of America, how lucky you are that you can at this moment.
Palin speaks English like I do, but it is not MY FIRST LANGUAGE.
Palin reminds me of those actors that were ruined when the moving pictures ADDED SOUND.
Off the stage!
...BUT THIS interview is Sarah Palin OFF the short chain. She sounds just as moronic as ever...IS THERE SOME difference here? She can´t string a sentence together...and when she does it hasn´t any content. IF SHE WERE A MAN, I think this would be an issue, probaly way BACK IN AUGUST. If Palin were a man, IN AUGUST, people would have said, THIS GUY PALIN IS NOT A PUBLIC SPEAKER, HE IS LUCKY TO BE A GOVERNOR IN ALASKA, HE ISN´T SAVVY...HAVE YOU EVER SEEN THIS GUY PALIN AND BUSH IN THE SAME PLACE AT THE SAME TIME? MAYBE THIS GUY PALIN IS REALLY BUSH IN A CLEVER DISGUISE.......