Cataloging the lies in Palin's "Going Rouge"

Discuss

51 Responses to “Cataloging the lies in Palin's "Going Rouge"”

  1. adamnvillani says:

    The problem is that I *don’t* even think she’s a nice lady.

  2. GauchoAmigo says:

    Dude. Who cares.

  3. VagabondAstronomer says:

    Just to be more to the point, I’m in Jacksonville, Florida, staunchly conservative and proud of it. Many are looking upon her visit as the Second Coming (which, for her, it actually is).

  4. Ian70 says:

    The common spelling mistake of Rogue (bad) versus Rouge (red) seems all-the-more prevalent these days. Whether the headline was a joke or a spelling mistake is up for argument; but the first line of this story is spelled wrong. That’s not the name of her book.

  5. Xopher says:

    And she can see the vodka from her house!

  6. VagabondAstronomer says:

    The Duchess of Wasilla is going to be in my little slice of Conservative Heaven (yawn) next week. The one local book chain that is still doing well here has a fairly conservative bent (the science section is teensy while the religious section is chockablock; oddly, so is the occult section) is hosting a book signing.
    Wish I could go. I’d (try to) have her sign a “Mad Lib” or something…

  7. gparker32 says:

    I hope they come up with better ‘lies’ than the two listed above. Neither of those seemed particularly damning to me.

    I think the bigger issue is why this book is being fact-checked to the extreme, when other books by politicians/celebrities aren’t (eg, Ted Kennedy’s latest).

    No, I’m not a Palin fan, I think she’s an embarrassment to the GOP.

    • Anonymous says:

      Um, if those aren’t damning, one wonders what would be to you.

      Those are pretty inarguably unethical moves, and potential criminal.

    • Micah says:

      I can’t stand this woman and have a hard time thinking of someone more poorly qualified for national public office (not to mention that I disagree with her on almost every major issue).

      But I have to agree with @gparker32 that these are very underwhelming gotchas. They’re going to have to do a whole lot better than that to keep from looking like a bunch of whiny character assassins.

      Raise the level of political discourse, people!

  8. Crawford Tillinghast says:

    The biggest lie in the book probably has to be SP’s own name on the cover.

    According to somebody over on Harlan Ellison’s messageboard, it was actually ghosted by a “Lynn Vincent”.

  9. erindipity says:

    She’s turning red? ^^

  10. cortana says:

    > #20

    Palin/Quayle? That’s nothing. Imagine Palin / Glenn Beck.

  11. Anonymous says:

    erindipity: well, she does hail from a “rouge state”

  12. arkizzle / Moderator says:

    Rouge? Rogue? I’m missing a joke here, aren’t I..

  13. Anonymous says:

    Is this boingboing’s homage to the CBC’s recent Rogue/Rouge mishap? If so, well played. Well played indeed.

    http://www.winnipegsun.com/entertainment/tv/2009/11/17/11777741.html

  14. Nores says:

    I am amused to note that “Going Rouge,” subtitled “An American Nightmare,” is actually a collection of essays about Palin from Salon and various other sources, published in conjunction with the book, with a similar cover and obviously confusing title.

    You’re far from the first to mix them up. At least one TV network showed the cover of “Going Rouge” when doing a piece on “Going Rogue” a couple days ago.

  15. arkizzle / Moderator says:

    Now that is funny. And deceptive :)

  16. IronEdithKidd says:

    Brainspore: Indeed. However, a splintered, impotent GOP may finally allow room for a non-wingnut 3rd party into viable political life. That would be a perfectly acceptable outcome in my book.

    This woman embodies just about the most dangerous combination of personality traits in a given individual: stupid and ambitious. May she fail in all her future political aspirations, whatever they may be. If she makes it to the final GOP ticket in ’12, Obama is all but guaranteed a second term. Chew on that CISBlues.

  17. adamnvillani says:

    The one local book chain that is still doing well here has a fairly conservative bent (the science section is teensy while the religious section is chockablock;

    The science section being tiny (and occult section being big) is part of your support for your thesis that your bookstore is conservative? Wow, I remember when I only despised Republicans for their economic and foreign policies. Now they’re being willfully stupid, and proud of it.

    • VagabondAstronomer says:

      Oh no, trust me here; books about evolution are never prominently displayed, all of the conservative writers are put out front, but all of Al Franken’s books had to be looked for. Right now, they have Palin and Beck’s books prominently displayed.
      Oh now, Adam, trust me, I know what I’m talking about here.

  18. Bus says:

    There’s already a Twitter site about fictional Palin antics.
    http://twitter.com/PalinFalsitudes

  19. motionview says:

    Palin boasts that she ran her campaign for governor on small donations and turned back large checks over conflicts of interest. In fact, she relied heavily on large donations and political action committees and took $1,000 each from a couple whose offices were raided by the FBI
    No citations, no links, “relied heavily”, took money from a couple whose offices were raided (that’s pretty much all politicians, including both Clintons, Gore, and Obama). Seems like a pretty lame fisking.

  20. MadMolecule says:

    I’m no feminist scholar, but it seems clear that the Palin phenomenon is a direct consequence of entrenched cultural patriarchy. As near as I can tell, the only reason anyone has ever heard of Sarah Palin is because she’s hot. That’s all.

    Watch her body language: the flirty wink, the false modesty of her smile, the measured eye-contact. Decades of Pavlovian conditioning have taught her that if she is attractive she will get what she wants. Her (totally logical) response has been to be attractive as much of the time as possible.

    The system of rewarding people for being hot is so thoroughly embedded in our culture that we almost made someone our Vice President solely because she is beautiful. Seriously, there is nothing else in the world that distinguishes Palin from a thousand small-time politicians. It’s a bit terrifying to contemplate.

    Tolstoy: “It is amazing how complete is the delusion that beauty is goodness.”

  21. Anonymous says:

    Proofreading is your friend.

  22. Daemon says:

    I’m a Palin fan BECAUSE she’s an embarassment to the GOP.

    Or would be, if the GOP had the capacity to feel shame.

  23. Anonymous says:

    I’m a Republican but not a Palin supporter. I got to say I’m so amused by the Pavlovian response of liberals to anything Sarah does. For people supposedly into Science and “reality-based thinking” you don’t have much of a clue about human behaviour do you?

    Palinites are a _counterculture_ They get off on sticking it to “The Man” (should that be “The Person”?) The louder your squeals of hate, the more they are convinced of the rightness of her ideas.

    Stop feeding them! Here’s how you do it instead. You say “Yeah Sarah” [use of first name is non-hostile and acknowledges her (and by extension her supporters) humanity] “is a nice lady” [subtext: she can bake cookies or shoot moose, but wouldn't be a good president] “but I support _____” [keeps things positive and forces a comparison.] See what I did there?

    And please remember she is a typical mediocre politician not a supernatural embodiment of evil. President Palin would be no James Madison but neither was Millard Fillmore and the republic survived him.

    • octopod says:

      >”is a nice lady” [subtext: she can bake cookies or shoot moose, but wouldn't be a good president]

      the patriarchy in all it’s splendor.

      • Anonymous says:

        So if I say one woman is better at shooting moose (a favorite pastime of oppressed women I’ve heard) than being president in your world that means I think all all women are better at shooting moose than being president is that right?

        Behold the cult of victimhood in all its glory.

        I would however like to thank the patriarchy police for putting down all the the “Is Trig really her baby?” and “How irresponsible for the mother of a downs syndrome baby to run for office” talk last year. Good job guys!

        • octopod says:

          no, not at all , it was the assumption that “nice lady” implied somehow being unfit for being president. my apologies as perhaps I was taking your comment out of context as I idly skimmed down the page over breakfast. anyways, I’d be ok with her as VP, there have been worse. otoh, I wouldn’t vote for her as her, and the republicans have pretty much self destructed, so it’s not rly a likely eventuality.

  24. Anonymous says:

    With all the intelligent people who apparently read BB, it’s amazing that more people haven’t yet caught on to the underlying reality of our political system: The powers that be in the Democratic and Republican parties, as well as the news media, are all really on the same side. These trivial snarky petty mean arguments are part of the Bread And Circus – divert people’s attention and get them passionate about trivialities while the really *important* things are overlooked. Like why the US economy is in shambles due to Wall Street powers that be that are backed by both the Republican and Democratic parties. Palin is merely yet another diversionary tactic, just like Dan Quayle, John Edwards, and all the other pipsqueaks that get their spot in the limelight. Palin is the political equivalent of Octomom – just another entertainer for the media to make us look the other way while our money and our freedom is being snatched away via sleight of hand.

  25. Canadian says:

    “Palin says a “Democrat lawmaker” complained that she was less “sparkly” after the 2008 election; it was actually a Republican.”

    One of Palin’s biggest falsehoods. SHOCKING!

  26. Ernunnos says:

    Meanwhile, Lloyd Blankfein admits Goldman Sachs took part in activities that were “clearly wrong”, and offers $500 million in loans – a tiny percentage of Goldman’s bonus pool – to small businesses by way of atonement.

    How many fact checkers are devoted to determining exactly what those activities were, and whether any of them rise to the level of a felony?

  27. TimJFowler says:

    If only there was a mod system I would mod up Anonymous #13!

    “Stop feeding them! Here’s how you do it instead. You say “Yeah Sarah” [use of first name is non-hostile and acknowledges her (and by extension her supporters) humanity] “is a nice lady” [subtext: she can bake cookies or shoot moose, but wouldn't be a good president] “but I support _____” [keeps things positive and forces a comparison.] See what I did there?”

    Hear, hear!

  28. Anonymous says:

    The Huffington Post… really, they are about as unbiased and honest as Michael Savage.

  29. Miak says:

    I agree with some posters. Why is she being targeted for fact check when Obama’s or Ted Kennedy or any other politician book isn’t?

    Biased media.

    • Moriarty says:

      “Why is she being targeted for fact check when Obama’s or Ted Kennedy or any other politician book isn’t?

      Biased media.”

      Obama’s books not targeted for fact check? Are you serious?

  30. rastronomicals says:

    Daemon | #12 |
    I’m a Palin fan BECAUSE she’s an embarassment to the GOP.

    Anonymous | #13 |
    The louder your squeals of hate, the more they are convinced of the rightness of her ideas.
    Stop feeding them!
    President Palin would be no James Madison but neither was Millard Fillmore and the republic survived him.

    With you Daemon. And # 13 Anonymous, your point is right as rain. But as a Dem, empowering Palin and her supporters is exactly what I want to do, because (assuming you don’t think she could ever get elected to higher office–and I don’t) a popular Palin splinters the Republican party . . . .

    Palin may be popular among the soccer mom yahoos who are outraged that their town hall won’t display a nativity scene, but seems to me most members of the Republican Party concerned with repairing the wounds of the ’08 election would rather shift the focus to “sensible” fiscal conservatives like Jindal or whoever this month’s flavor might be.

    Whatever gets the two factions fighting works for me.

    • Brainspore says:

      I’d rather the two factions were fighting from intellectually defensible positions. If every election comes down to “Democrats vs. Crazy Bastards” then there’s little to keep the Democrats in check. Looking more competent than Palin isn’t a very high bar to meet.

  31. dculberson says:

    Does the Huffington Post, or Boing Boing, claim to be unbiased?

  32. tallpat says:

    Perceived bias is perceived

  33. Anonymous says:

    I’m no fan of Palin’s, but I’m not impressed by those couple of examples.

    Re: natural gas pipelines, and the “terms that favored only a few companies”: “Few” seems very vague. Also I’m wondering just how many companies exist that might be competing for that contract. Are there more than a few companies even capable of building a natural gas pipeline?

    Oh, God. Apropos of nothing, I just imagined a Palin/Quayle ticket. I’m going to have nightmares.

  34. Teller says:

    With the release of her book, the SF Chronicle, poster child for why newspapers will die, ran a front page article on the horrors of Palin. Then in another section, a Chronicle reporter travelled to many independent book stores in the area to ask if they will carry the book. Most said “Dear God, no!” Such a lovely place: the tolerant, diversity-loving Bay Area.

    • Moriarty says:

      “tolerant, diversity-loving”

      Comments about San Francisco or Sarah Palin aside, can we please end the meme that liberal=”tolerant”=”has nothing negative to say about anything,” thereby making any liberal who expresses a negative opinion about any person or thing somehow a hypocrite?

      • Teller says:

        Moriarty: Easy now, you’re defining tolerant in your own way, then chastising me for restricting your freedom of expression. You can say whatever you want, my friend. Tolerant, to me, means permissive, accepting – two pillars of the liberal ethos in San Francisco. Ask anyone who lives and works here – like me! I find the liberals here astoundingly intolerant of non-liberals.

        Xopher: Independent bookstores may stock what they please with my blessings. But don’t be so smug as to suggest it’s because they won’t sell any of the books. Smug – because as far as the indy’s are concerned, everyone who lives here thinks as they do. Or should. What horseshit. Diversity isn’t just a racial term. It means DIVERSITY. Read Steve Rubenstein’s Chron article of Tuesday – independent bookstores consider the book – one they haven’t read – as “drivel.” It’s all political correctness. So don’t bait me with that free market, uh, drivel. They’re “making a stand.” oy.

    • Xopher says:

      So, you don’t think bookstores have a right to make choices about what they give space to on their own shelves? And you don’t think they have the right to decide that in San Francisco they’re unlikely to sell as many copies of that as (whatever they could put on the shelf instead)?

      Not exactly a free-market kind of sentiment.

      • strangefriend says:

        ‘And you don’t think they have the right to decide that in San Francisco they’re unlikely to sell as many copies of that as (whatever they could put on the shelf instead)?’

        THE ASS MASTER: MY COMPLETE SAGA

        (Hat tip to Margaret Cho.)

  35. Xopher says:

    Why should they carry anything they don’t want to carry? If I own a bookstore, do I have to carry The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Malleus Maleficarum even if there are people in my community who would buy them?

    I don’t expect a bookstore in Ozark, Arkansas (to pick an obvious enclave of right-wing loonies) to carry The Spiral Dance and Das Kapital, either.

    Public library, different story. But privately-owned bookstore? Why on Earth should they?

    • Teller says:

      “I don’t expect a bookstore in Ozark, Arkansas (to pick an obvious enclave of right-wing loonies) to carry The Spiral Dance and Das Kapital, either.”

      Wouldn’t you think better of them if they did? And don’t you, and the rest of the world, think San Francisco and environs are much more open-minded? Isn’t that the perception San Franciscans promote? In fact, cherish? And here you are – suggesting local SF booksellers are just as uptight and narrow-minded as those in Ozark, Arkansas. Further note: I couldn’t be less interested in a book to read than Palin’s. Truly not my cup of vodka.

  36. holtt says:

    I used to work for a company named Rogue Wave. People always spelled it Rouge Wave. Good thing they also bought the domain name “rougewave.com”

    Amusingly, the website “goingrouge.com” is an ad site that actually mentions Palin. “goingrogue.com” is an ad site with game stuff.

Leave a Reply