It was just another day for Sarah Palin as she had an exceptional interview with talk show Queen Oprah Winfrey then sat back to hear the firestorm of criticism from the far left media. In the process, the Nielsen TV ratings company was trying to compile the overnight audience for the Oprah Show and their computer processing center lost power for much of the night delaying ratings reports for more than 24 hours.
At the time of this writing they are still not back on the air but Oprah averaged under 7 million viewers last year and her first few shows this year have been around 7 million. Let us see who benefited the most from the appearance, Oprah with ratings or Sarah with book sales. It was a long awaited interview ever since Oprah endorsed Obama last year and then said no candidates would be on her show.
Of course Obama had already been on the show and she did appear with him several times during the campaign not to mention the ill-fated Chicago Olympic bid trip with the Obama's. Still, when she asked Palin if she was upset from being shunned Sarah said she didn't ask to be on the show and didn't expect to be with Oprah's support of Obama. It was a very generous answer.
The long awaited interview with the girl that won't go away Sarah Palin went fine and the response from the liberal media was typically deafening which in and of itself tells you a lot about the bias of the media and bitterness they feel about her being a populist politician and now a stunningly successful author. You see, nearly every liberal media member I saw complaining about the interview has a book for sale and none are even in the same universe with Sarah in terms of sales.
Examples of media bias:
Complaints that the Palin book and Oprah interview fail to address Palin's ambitions in 2012 miss the entire point of the book. Although the last chapter does talk about the future, the intent of the book was a reflection on the past. Why in the world would a memoir about the past talk about a political campaign well into the future? This is biased and a deliberate distortion of the book.
All the liberal media trash Palin as a viable candidate for president yet Palin did not run for president (maybe our elitist media need a fact check on them) and she has never expressed an interest in running for president in 2012. She is trying to sell books, the same thing all the journalists are doing. Perhaps they should try reporting news. Maybe the negativity on the part of liberal elitists has more to do with the fact Palin has sold far more books than they ever will meaning jealously is a powerful motivator for biased reporting.
Polls used to show how Palin has lost her popularity by all the liberal media from Washington Post reporters to MSNBC comrades do not reflect registered voters, are not scientific and are designed to distort the results. In spite of this, the polls show that Palin has lost less popularity than Obama and his wife Michelle yet the liberal elitists forget to mention that point.
For the truth pay attention to the polls from Rasmussen, a long established and reputable polling firm for the national media. Palin hit a high on her national favorability rating right after the Republican convention last year when she reached 52% favorable. Monday of this week, November 16, 2009 Rasmussen reported Palin had a 51% national favorable rating.
For a dose of the truth, that represents a loss of 1% in the polls a year after the election and after Sarah resigned as Governor of Alaska. For comparison, Obama reached a 65% favorable rating on January 21 of this year and now has a 48% favorable rating. a loss of 17%. Now if my math is correct that means Obama lost 16 times as much support as Palin since he took office. Funny the liberal liars didn't mention this fact.
.jpg)
Chris Matthews, dean of MSNBC naysayers, continues to show fabricated pictures of Palin in his stories, and does not say they are photo shop fabrications. This is a violation of basic journalistic standards yet indicative of the MSNBC hatred for Palin. It demonstrates why MSNBC is at the bottom of the pit in terms of ratings and credibility.
Norah O'Donnell, MSNBC reporter, while attempting to do unbiased news reporting consistently uses stories, quotes and photos clearly intended to undermine Palin's credibility. She also says there is no way Palin can get elected president in 2012, a most audacious opinion from someone who is supposed to report the news, not opinions.
Tina Brown, journalist, partner in the Daily Beast blog site and former editor of Vanity Fair and The New Yorker had this to say about Palin.
"That Sarah Palin, oh what a tease."
Tina compared Palin's style to Obama who she described in the following way.
"Obama's cerebral aloofness makes him a cold fish in a hot medium, and Michelle, who used to provide the human crackle, looked as downcast as her husband's latest poll numbers when peddling health care to seniors last week."
The good news is that for all the bad there was a lot of good and the general public knows better than to trust the national media when it comes to Sarah Palin. Long ago the public figured out she was one of them, not one of Washington elitists.
More later when Nielsen finally gets back on track.
No comments:
Post a Comment