"Palinites", What Do You Think of the Enquirer NOW???
By anniepa
@anniepa (27955)
United States
September 16, 2008 7:40pm CST
Several months ago at least on myLot member called the so-called "liberal" MSM to task for not picking up on a story broken by - get ready! - the National Enquirer. This member was accusing the mainstream media of covering up the scandal reported by this well-known supermarket tabloid about an alleged affair John Edwards had had. As it turned out, a short time later Edwards "confessed" and the MSM were scratching their heads and wondering if they'd done the right thing by refusing to "bite" and do their own digging for dirt regarding this affair and the allegation of a resulting "love child".
Fast forward to the present time.
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/_palin_family_shockers_what_sarahs_really_hiding/celebrity/65407
It turns out this suddenly completely credible source of political news has come out with a new story about which it appears they're going to be every bit as diligent as they were in getting the scoop on Edwards. Some of the story I linked to does involve Palin's older children and I apologize for that because I've been on record as not believing politicians' kids should be subject to attacks by the press or anyone else. However, don't forget this IS the highly respected National Enquirer, so if they printed it there must be a darned good reason for doing so, right?
It seems these allegation of drug abuse by the Palin teens and the "not quite as supportive reaction to Bristol's pregnancy as we'd been led to believe" by Sarah isn't all the enquiring minds at the Enquirer as discovered. Apparently I missed last week's scoop of the alleged extramarital affair between Sarah and husband Todd's business partner but more has been promised.
What I'd really like to discuss here is, do those of you who thought Sarah Palin walks on water along with her pal McCain feel any differently about her now? I have a feeling I will no matter what I say here, but I really don't care to read about how the National Enquirer is nothing more than a gossip rag and that nothing they print can be believed. It's YOU on the right who have convinced me that isn't the case so if you change your tune now after praising them for breaking the Edwards story I just might tend to think there's a bit of hypocrisy at play. I think one thing has been established for sure and that's that the Enquirer doesn't have either a liberal or conservative bias - they're equal opportunity scandal busters!
Annie
4 people like this
9 responses
@irishidid (8688)
• United States
17 Sep 08
I didn't agree with it being done to Edwards and I don't agree with it being done to Palin. Family matters are family matters and if one or the other has done something it does not belong in public as long as it does not affect the public.
I'm sure that our politicians in the past beginning with our founding fathers had things in their lives that would probably curl our hair. Do you really need to know it all?
Nation Enquirer is a rag. Always has been always will be.
2 people like this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
17 Sep 08
I really applaud and respect your consistency! If it's right or wrong for one, it should be right or wrong for the other - period! It IS a "rag" and I was amazed at how some people suddenly thought it was worthy of a Pulitzer Prize after the Edwards story.
Annie
@irishidid (8688)
• United States
17 Sep 08
The stupidity of it and other rags at the check out stand have me shaking my head. They probably hate me at the store because I turn the rags around so I don't have to see them while I'm waiting my turn. 
I honestly liked Edwards and his confession made no change in my opinion. I could go through a list of politicians that have done stupid things in their personal life that did not affect my views. I'm more apt to be critical of religious leaders who say one thing and then do another, then lie about it.
I honestly liked Edwards and his confession made no change in my opinion. I could go through a list of politicians that have done stupid things in their personal life that did not affect my views. I'm more apt to be critical of religious leaders who say one thing and then do another, then lie about it.2 people like this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
17 Sep 08
I couldn't agree more about the religious leaders! They tell the rest of us what to do or not do, they often really pass judgment on others every day and get away with it since their somehow better than us, then we find out they've been doing worse things than what they've been condemning others for - give me a break!
Annie
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
17 Sep 08
Have you been on vacation? lmao Sorry I was reading that last week. I think that they are "equal opportunity scandal busters". I really like that! I guess if they are lying than they just screwed themselves because I have seen some people here swear by the "National Enquirer".
2 people like this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
17 Sep 08
Hey!!! Seriously, I had a bit of a rough week last week, I was here but not as much as usual and I lost touch with a lot of stuff going on because my mom took a nasty fall last Saturday and was in the hospital all week, and now is in the nursing home for PT, hopefully for only a couple weeks.
Anyway, I did see a blip here and there about the "affair" but I didn't get any details, and would you believe I didn't even have a chance to glance at the scandal rags in the supermarket check-out line...lol.
You're so right, which is why I posted this, to see if that reverence toward that paper still holds.
Annie
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
17 Sep 08
I am really sorry to see your mom fell I hope that she recovers fast and well.
As for the "National Enquirer" I really do not read it but I have heard that they had some reports up there one night while listenting to the radio. But, from what I have heard that's not "the big" story. I honestly do not think that the sheep care what comes out about her but the "undecided" and the "Independents" care about the items that will come out.
1 person likes this
@irisheyes (4370)
• United States
17 Sep 08
People cherry pick what supports their choice and then turn around and condemn the other side for doing the exact same thing. None of this matters much to me. Even if I agreed with any of her political philosphpy, the fact that Sarah Palin was only issued a passport a short time ago gave her candidacy zero crediblity as far as i'm concerned. Having a president who is computer illiterate and a vice president who never set foot on foreign soil is such a scary thought to me that I doubt anything the national Enquirer could report would have any impact.
2 people like this
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
17 Sep 08
going to try and stay impartial and consistant.
Yes, te enquirer was right on Edwards, sort of, but even the enquirere gets lucky sometimes. I'm going to wait, as I did with edwards for someone to come out and say, "yep". My thoughts were on Edaards, and you can read back, that it was a non issue, because it was a marital issue and he wasn't running for office. But Palin is, so I'm going to watch quietly for a while, but again, it is a family issue. I would like to point out, having been a single father to 3 teenage daughters over the years, that things happen with kids, they do dumb things. We can be the best of parents and they still do dumb things sometimes. Would the affair be a game changer for me? I'm not going to answer, I haven't even made my pick yet. But let me ask all of you this, was Bill Clinton's running around a game changer for anyone? If you were old enough to vote for jfk and were a democrat, would his runnings have been a game changer? I Am going to assume anniw that you voted for clinton as I can't see you as a Bush Sr supporter, or a Bob Dole supporter. How much did Clinton's running s affect your vote? I'm not being snide, I'm really not, I am just asking if this kind of thing is a game changer for you in general.
1 person likes this
@Hatley (163781)
• Garden Grove, California
17 Sep 08
anniepa help I am about to throw in the towel over all of
this political garbage and mud slinging. every little while
'you read two opposing things about all the candidates, and then also some mylotters throw in some more fuel to the fire. I
just dont care anymore, I am too numb from he says, she says, they say, national inquirer, the whosits, the whatsits, I am just '
goiing to do my best to sift through all the crapola and vote
for whom I think is the best person. and no I a m not going to say whom I will vote for. I did that the other day and my star lost one point to some nasty minuser who did not agree I had a right to my own opiniion.
1 person likes this
@morethanamolehill (1586)
• United States
17 Sep 08
Hey Hatley, I did have a star rating of 8 when I hit 100. You see where it is now. These people will say whatever they want to say and when I try to debate them on it they cop out. (see above) But they all say "No I don't down rate you for having an opinion." Riiight.
1 person likes this
@tazzybaby (115)
• United States
17 Sep 08
I don't agree with it being done to anyone; and as far as the Enquirer goes, I know just little enough about all and what's going on to make a full magazine myself, and I know close to nothing.
I try to ignore all of it. Whether I'm paying attention or not, someone will be voted in and I have nothing to say about it. Either way everyone will freak out and want them kicked out of office for something, so who really cares? They will both face the same issues in office and will more than likely take the same actions. Who is just going to look better in future encyclopedias?
As far as Palin goes, I heard she's the one that was helping to push bans on classic books and such. If that's true, I certainly don't want her any where near the white house, but I like McCain, so either way, what I want will turn out crap.
1 person likes this
@tazzybaby (115)
• United States
17 Sep 08
As mayor, because of her religious views, she tried to get books banned that had "inappropriate language". Apparently a librarian faced losing her job because she wouldn't help Palin get them banned from the library. One article in New York Times says the librarian was fired, but had to be brought back because of the public. This is the list of books that were targeted by her, but I don't think that's all:
A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L'Engle (Always loved this one)
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
Catch-22 by Joseph Heller
Anything by Stephen King (Big fan)
Everything by J.K Rowling
Most of William Shakespear's work
and Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary by the Merriam-Webster Editorial Staff
How true is this? I don't know, just put "Sarah Palin Books" or a similar search in a search engine and read the articles and blogs.
1 person likes this
@devylan (695)
• United States
17 Sep 08
Wow. So she cares more about her image than her children's well-being apparently. Hmmm. Well, I didn't like her before, and now I really don't like her, so my view obviously hasn't changed, but I have a feeling this won't sway too many people otherwise.
1 person likes this
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
17 Sep 08
Personally I feel families need to be left out of it completely. Especially minor children. Edward's affair was none of our business. Palin's daughter is none of our business.
I personally do not feel any of them "walk on water". I was excited about Palin when she first came out, but now I think I am either sticking with RON PAUL or another third party candidate. I always liked Nader. Maybe I will vote for him. Either way, I am not really thrilled with what either of the two major parties are offering. I mean come on, it is an election year, we are in a recession and neither are telling us how they are going to get us out of debt and balance our budget. CNN ( and you know how I feel about them) are even saying that neither candidate has focused on telling us how they are going to fix the BIGGEST problems we have. The ecomony and our debt. By this time in the election they should be into major details about their plans. It makes me wonder....do they even have a plan?
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
17 Sep 08
That's kind of ironic, isn't it, that CNN would be complaining that the candidates aren't focused on telling us what they're going to do about the economy when it's them and the rest of the media who are playing all the clips over and over about pigs with lipstick, etc. Anyway, Obama did come out with a plan about the banking problems and all that mess but McCain wants to appoint a commission, like the 9/11 Commission. Of course, McCain also said our economy is fundamentally strong...
Annie
@Rachel85044 (426)
• United States
17 Sep 08
Well, I think there has to be some truth to it or Palin would be well with in her rights to go after them legally right? They have to have source to back these claims up! Anyways I don't like the kids being brought into it but if they have these types of issues it makes you question if she really can successfully juggle work, kids, and marriage.
Also I am not relgious but I know most of her fans are and you know in many relgions if the relgious leader (example pastor) has serious problems with his children he is asked to step down the reasoning for it is if he can not control her home how can she control her family? I wonder if people will look at it that way?? Probably not!
Its amazing Chelsea Clinton really never did anything to warrant her being made put in the media but her looks were always made fun of and that was ok. But when the Bush girls had drinking problems no one made a big deal it was just kids being kids and the Palin kids seem to be getting the same kind of consideration
1 person likes this
