Taylor Marsh Lets Her Palin Hatred Get The Better Of Her Judgement Once Again

Sigh.....leftist women just can't let it go. Their hate for Sarah Palin, or rather the values she not only represents but lives, burns undiminished. (link)
Taylor Marsh, once again, has another bash at Palin and in doing so abrogates any right to be considered a journalist-but certainly she qualifies as a "journolist" the cabal of media writers who worked to elect Obama in 2008.


Marsh comments on Kelly Ayotte being possibly considered as a running mate for Romney;


"So, a qualified woman finally appears amid all the pasty white males considered on the short list, with many political insiders believing Sen. Marco Rubio’s baggage would be just too much for Team Mitt."

Clearly Marsh's whole attitude is that since her inamorata Hillary did not become president some other woman should. Her reason is so feminista skewed that journalism flies out the window in the process. Firstly, Rubio is an Hispanic and, especially as he lives in Florida would not be considered "pasty white" as if skin color is an indicator of capability-I thought Martin Luther King had put that to rest. 

But Marsh is so determined that sex trumps qualifications, after all what experience has Ayotte actually had to be an heartbeat away from the presidency, that she actually overcomes her prejudice against conservative, right to life, Christian women to push for Ayotte to be amongst those considered.

Secondly, Marsh has no way of knowing who is on the short list, which deliberations others  in the media have commented on as being highly secretive.  Susana Martinez has been bandied about which seems to have escaped Marsh. She writes; 

"Obviously, her politics aren't mine, as I could never vote for a woman who’s against my own individual freedoms and right to self-determination, but then I'm a liberal, not a religious conservative."

And then she segue's into her hobby horse, bashing Sarah Palin.

"Conservative women have been silent on the importance of getting past Sarah Palin’s disastrous vice presidential run. It’s one of the least reported and written about realities of the 2012 race, with the only one I know having mentioned it regularly being yours truly"


The explanation why Marsh is the only one mentioning  this theme is that it is so preposterous and discredited no journalist of repute would  say such a silly thing.

Look Ms Marsh, try, really give it, non-prejudicial analysis, a try. Palin's vice-presidential run was not "disastrous" it did not cost McCain the presidency, it has not made the selection of women more difficult.  The reality Taylor is it is the male campaign managers for McCain who have distorted the truth to cover their ineptitude. But don't take my word for it as a mere male-here below, yet again, are the unvarnished facts from the exits polls and the common sense explanations as to why McCain's campaign, not Palin's was so disastrous.

Here are the facts;


(By the way, it was Hillary's campaign that was 'disastrous" her losing to a basically little know junior senator)

When they start apportioning the blame to the real people responsible for it – McCain’s team and Game Change authors – the schadenfreude will be palpable.

The left’s theme that Palin cost McCain votes is totally refuted by independent exit poll analysis by the likes of CNN.   This sudden discovery that perhaps the 2008 disaster was not Palin’s fault has other reasons for surfacing from the MSM then some new regard for Palin – far from it.  

It is being slowly puffed up so as to tie Romney to McCain along the lines of “the GOP is nominating someone who lost to the last one they nominated, and who ran a disastrous campaign." Thus, shifting the blame from Palin to McCain and his team will be part of the Dem's campaign effort.

This is all to the good, as Palin has survived the onslaught, and when Romney ceases to be “the party leader until November,” as Mitch McConnell said today, the meme she caused the 2008 defeat will have been discarded and discredited by its own creators as she moves towards 2016.

Because it suited the MSM/left to denigrate Sarah Palin whilst she was viewed as a possible threat to President Obama’s re-election chances, the prevailing meme has been that it was Palin’s “disastrous” selection/campaign that led to McCain’s defeat.

This histrionic myth-making reached its apotheosis in the Hollywood hit piece “Game Change” which followed hard on the heels of the Joe McGinnis hatchet job. The release of both were obviously timed to derail the expected Palin run for the GOP nomination.  No doubt there was much cursing by various publishers and producers when Palin decided not to be a candidate.

The Game Change team relied on McCain team gossip and character assassination because it suited their purpose.  What it could not do forever was to destroy the obvious facts, no matter how much they shrouded them in leftist malarkey.

As its most basic, the facts are that:

1. Palin lifted McCain ahead of Obama after she was named to the ticket and gave her convention speech.

2. Palin made the obvious point that candidate Obama had little legislative experience, no business experience and no foreign affairs experience  and had associations with a number of disreputable characters and a history of drug taking.

3. Nobody really knew anything about him, and what was allowed to escape through the “journolist” conspiracy leftist media was quickly shunted off the front page or not discussed at all. Even Jimmy Kimmel questioned this recently –  ”how did we miss this”.    (In 2008, Obama’s own book discussed his eating dog meat).

4. The McCain team and McCain lost the election, not Palin, as this obvious comment states:

“She would have led the Republicans to victory had it not been for the September financial collapse and McCain’s disastrous decision to suspend his campaign so that he could vote for the TARP bailout in Washington.”

Here is an analysis from the commentator ZH100 at Conservatives4Palin followed by the actual post-2008 analysis, which shows the positive effect Palin had in spite of  the disastrous efforts by the  McCain personnel and McCain’s lacklustre efforts under their guidance.

From the article:

‘The Truth HBO’s ‘Game Change’ Hides: Palin Carried McCain Until He Changed the Game’ (by Joel B. Pollak) 

“I briefly served as a volunteer speechwriter on the McCain-Palin campaign in 2008. I was never part of the inner circle, and even if I had “dirt” to dish, I wouldn’t dare violate the confidentiality agreement I signed – even though that hasn’t stopped some former McCain campaign aides from publicly blaming Gov. Sarah Palin for everything that went wrong.

But here’s the truth about the McCain-Palin campaign, which HBO’s upcoming “Game Change” film attempts to shroud in fanciful anti-Palin fiction: Palin carried the campaign.

She would have led the Republicans to victory had it not been for the September financial collapse and McCain’s disastrous decision to suspend his campaign so that he could vote for the TARP bailout in Washington.

After the bailout vote, support for the Republican ticket collapsed. “

From the article:

‘Palin comparison’

At Circo, following HBO’s “Game Change,” an operative involved in Sarah Palin’s heady VP-maybe days, said:

“McCain’s keepers, bald, smoking, hating her, couldn’t deal with a woman candidate. A Christian who needs to pray had no one to pray with. Separated from family, she was kept in her room. A runner who does five miles a day locked in a room!”

From the article:

Eric Schnurer

“I believed Sarah Palin a brilliant choice for McCain at the time, and I continue to believe so. When the economy (and McCain campaign) collapsed, the McCain-Palin ticket was ahead and just about every Democratic consultant I knew believed they were headed to victory – and that was largely because of Palin, whose selection galvanized a base that McCain needed and otherwise lacked.”

*******************************************************************

The left continues with their big lie that Palin cost McCain the 2008 election. This is often seen in comments from so called “Republicans” along the lines of “I was going to vote for McCain,  but when he chose Palin I switched to Obama” and similar such nonsense.

Here are are the unbiased, unvarnished facts (with links to the full reports in red) from respected professional polling firms.  The major issue was the economy, the Lehman brother’s collapse, and McCain “suspending” his campaign.

Palin’s addition to the ticket was a significant plus factor, which  kept McCain as close as he was until nothing could save him as the economy tanked and the bail-out inflamed passions.

It has been a disgusting spectacle watching the McCain team, through the mechanism of the Hollywood left’s hatchet job “Game Change” put the blame for their incompetence on Palin.  The facts prove otherwise.

****************************************************************************

PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE & THE PRESS November 5, 2008

Yet those who cited Palin’s selection as a factor in their vote — 60% of all voters — favored McCain by 56% to 43%.

****************************************************************************

After the election, on Nov. 7, 2008, an article published by Rasmussen

 Rasmussen Reports

Friday, November 07, 2008

Sixty-nine percent (69%) of Republican voters say Alaska Governor Sarah Palin helped John McCain’s bid for the presidency, even as news reports surface that some McCain staffers think she was a liability.

********************************************************************************

Gallup Daily: Election 2008

Despite the premise of “Game Change” – that Sarah Palin cost John McCain the 2008 presidential election – Gallup polls prove HBO’s assertion categorically false. Palin wasn’t the reason the Republicans lost the election. She’s the only reason they had a fighting chance up until the time McCain suspended his presidential campaign in late September.

Gallup polls from the last presidential race prove that once Palin joined the ticket on Aug. 29, 2008, McCain’s ratings steadily climbed to a point where the Republican ticket even out shined Democratic Sen. Barack Obama.

In the two weeks before Palin joined the McCain ticket, the Arizona senator drifted in the low 40 percentile range, mostly around 41, 42 and 43 percent, while Obama held as much as an 8 point lead at about 49 and 50 percent. Four days after Palin joined the ticket, however, McCain’s numbers climbed to 45 percent and Obama’s sank to 47 percent, narrowing the gap significantly from eight points to two.

Between Sept. 4-6, McCain and Palin actually overshot the Obama ticket by 3 percent with the Republicans in the lead at 48 percent and the Democrats at only 45. McCain consistently held that lead until Sept. 15, and then the candidates balanced out with Obama enjoying a mere three-point lead, and no lead at all from Sept. 22-24, when the numbers were tied at 46 percent.

[...]

Some were intrigued as to how McCain’s decision would play out in the polls, but once he suspended his campaign in late September he never recaptured the lead he enjoyed with the breaking news of recruiting Palin.

It was downhill from there.

McCain’s campaign was taken out of suspension, but it never actually got back off the ground. From then, the gap between McCain and Obama only widened, leaving the Republicans at a severe disadvantage. McCain’s numbers remained steady around 42 and 43 percent throughout October, but Obama’s continued climbing, and by October 31, McCain’s standing had dropped to 40 percent and Obama’s had reached 53 percent - a devastating 13-percent gap.