Two cover stories from the same magazine. You be the judge.
Once again I must confess my utter amazement at the herculean effort launched by major media publications to completely suppress any news about a possible affair between John Edwards and Rielle Hunter (except for The National Enquirer, which broke the story), when compared to the gargantuan dogpile of rumors, speculation, gossip, half-truths, and personal attacks that was dumped on Sarah Palin and her family this past weekend.
Major news outlets and blogs have managed, I believe, to dredge up more dirt on Sarah Palin in four days than they have on Barack Obama in the past two years.
ADDED: check out this fawning profile of Janet Napolitano and Sarah Palin published by Newsweek in October 2007. Newsweek even used the hallowed word "post-partisan" to describe their new approaches to solving their state's problems. (*sigh*)
Liberals smeared Sarah Palin as "Dan Quayle in a dress." A more accurate comparison, as Rush Limbaugh pointed out yesterday, would be between Palin and Clarence Thomas, who was forced to endure what he described as an "electronic lynching" because he committed the grave, unpardonable sin of being black and conservative.
There's also this -- the Thomas nomination and the subsequent depths to which liberals sank in order to destroy him galvanized conservatives around him and elevated him to the position of cult leader within the ranks of conservatives. The same thing seems to be happening now with Sarah Palin. The McCain-Palin campaign is reporting that they received $10 million in contributions this weekend alone. McCain is playing it smart and letting the Democrats and their acolytes in the press run wild with their Palin smears. When they've had their fun, and the conservative base has solidly rallied in defense of Palin, then McCain will unleash a devastating attack on the character of liberals and on the leadership abilities of Barack Obama, who -- so far -- has been either unwilling or unable to stop the Palin smears. Just you wait and see.
Finally, this incident is yet another in a long string of tell-tale episodes proving that feminism's professed support for strong, career-minded women, and the Democratic Party's perpetual lip service in support of those values, is nothing but an outright lie. I don't regularly link to Michelle Malkin's syndicated columns (although I am a regular visitor and commenter on her blog) but this time she hits it out of the park, providing example after example of feminists and liberals smearing conservative women as bimbos, sock puppets, and bad mothers.
Oh -- here's one last thing to chew on: Liberals regularly smear conservatives and Christians and accuse us of using the threat of sin and hell and guilt and scandal to repress and dominate and victimize our children, thus depriving them of a normal, happy, care-free experience of adult sexuality. But now, when we stand by a family going through a pregnancy crisis and support them rather than offer condemnation -- we're the bad guys again! Liberals should be congratulating us for finally seeing the light and accepting youthful sexuality as a wonderful thing. Instead, they don't understand why we aren't joining them in smearing this family -- after all, they seem to be asking, isn't it the "Christian" thing to kick "sinners" when they are down? They promote love and peace and accuse us of hate. But when we choose grace and refuse to feed their hatred, we are liars and hypocrites.
I give up. We just can't win.