An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« We’re Not a 50/50 Country; There WILL BE a Mandate

Pew Poll: McCain Narrows Obama Lead To Six Points »

Sarah Palin Doesn’t Understand The First Amendment

Posted by ELYAS BAKHTIARI in At TMV.
Nov 2nd, 2008 | Comments

Here’s Palin defending her attacks on Obama’s associations with Ayers, Wright, etc., and blaming the media for portraying comments like “he pals around with terrorists” as negative:

“If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations, then I don’t know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media.”

Is she being dishonest or does she just not understand? The First Amendment wasn’t designed to protect government officials from the press, it’s supposed to protect the press and the people from government officials. It’s a right that is often misinterpreted, and many people equate freedom of speech with freedom from criticism.

But someone running for vice president should know better than that. I, too, worry about the future of our country “in terms of the First Amendment,” but only if Sarah Palin somehow gets into office.

Alec over at PBH has been compiling a list of Sarah Palin’s “greatest hits” from the campaign so far. This is, to me, one of the more disturbing quotes from her, and I think it’s worthy of an honorable mention at least.

UPDATE: A McCain spokesperson had trouble explaining Palin’s comment. VIDEO HERE.

Ads by Project Wonderful! Your ad here, right now: $0

DLS

Do you have a _real_ command of English? Do you understand the media's leftist leanings and agenda and "slant" (research the word and its meanings if you must)? Do you know what "double standard" and "hypocrisy" mean?

Arrgh....

JSpencer

Yet more evidence (as if any more should be needed) that not far under the surface, and not far beyond her talking points, lies a rather poorly informed individual when it comes to either the USC or the workings of US government (not to mention little things like science). That any serious person would consider her worthy of any office higher than the one she holds now is in itself cause for concern, as it reveals a very low standard for leadership. Yes, I understand she can be charming in a certain partisan way - but even then she's no Tina Fey.

Elyas

DLS, let's say, just for the sake of argument, that the media has some sort of collective leftist agenda. Explain to me how that is a first amendment issue.

senor

Actually, Palin is right. The greatest cultural development of the last 30 years is the acceptance of the proposition propounded during Watergate that the media is as important as the subjects it covers. The corporate media--with the tacit endorsement of the three branches of government, has become a fourth branch of government, responsible, for example for "vetting" Sarah Palin. With such power, the media does indeed have the ability to censor--as it demonstrated amply this campaign season by screaming "racism" every time Obama was attacked. How ironic, that the MSM, which is protected under the first amendment, should use that same right to stifle opposition voices. The organs of dissent have become the mouthpieces for uniformity.

JSpencer

Senor, I think you're giving too much credit to the MSM so far as them having any sort of actual plan. Sure, they may have the ability to frame political issues, but if their past performance is any indication, they are a lot more inept and random than the "liberal media" meme suggests. Then again, maybe they're trying to atone for past sins.

blog comments powered by Disqus