Tonight, Sarah Palin drove another stake in the heart of those fuddy-duddy reactionaries that constitute our mainstream media. Going toe-to-toe with a senator with decades of experience, she more than held her own, giving lie to the media constructed narrative that she was an inexperienced hick from nowheresville Alaska. It demonstrates once again why the media is held in such contempt. For economic and ego reasons, they consider themselves to be our gatekeepers, but frankly they are not that smart. They are not rocket scientists – figuratively or literally. They are certainly no smarter than Sarah Palin. I would be willing to bet that in a free debate with Katie Couric, Palin would come out the victor. (Frank Luntz’s focus group saw her winning literally by acclamation over Biden.) (link)Expect the mainstream press to tell us otherwise tomorrow. And the next day. And ...
- - -
Michelle Malkin: Sarah Rocks
- - -
New York Times declares Sarah the winner!
Well, not exactly. But this is as close as we'll ever see the ultra-partisan liberals there admit it anyway:
In Debate, Republican Ticket Survives One Test
It must have pained them to write that.
- - -
David Brooks, New York Times, forgetting that the networks can edit their lengthy sit-down taped interviews to make the most sane person look like a blithering idiot - when they want to:
"Where was this woman was (sic) during her interview with Katie Couric?"
- - -
Front page, New York Post:
- - -Rich Lowry: "She's Back!"
- - -
Dick Morris: "Last night was a big, big win for Sarah Palin."
- - -
Roanoke Times declares Sarah the winner!
See if you can figure this out. On Thursday (see "Stakes are high for veep debate") we were treated to this declaration from the Times editorialists:
"Vice presidential debates are rarely as anticipated -- or as important -- as the one this evening between Delaware Sen. Joe Biden and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin."
And now, after Sarah Palin's performance at the debate? Dan Radmacher, editorial page editor of the same Times:
"I think, in the end, we're back to where we ought to be: The vice presidential candidates really don't matter."
It hurts, doesn't it, Dan?
- - -
From the in-the-Obama-tank loons at the Charleston Gazette yesterday:
"... America's second-highest elective post is just "a heartbeat away from the presidency." Therefore, it's vital that the vice president be a leader of deep wisdom, thorough experience and sound judgment.
Keep this concern in mind as you watch tonight's vice presidential debate - and when you vote, either in early balloting or on Nov. 4."
This morning?
Nothing. Absolute silence.
