by Jack Lee
NOTICE Due to software bugs no comments can be received for this article. We have no idea why, but it’s been reported to the webmaster and maybe he can fix it. We’ve created an alternate site “The Game Change Site for comments” and this site will accept comments.
Yours truly has recently come under fire for reporting excerpts from the book “Game Change”. This covers the presidential candidates in 2008 and more. Wikipedia (not always the best source) summarized it and in this case they did a pretty good job:
“Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime is a book by political journalists John Heilemann and Mark Halperin about the 2008 United States presidential election.
The book is based on interviews with more than 300 people involved in the campaign. It discusses factors including Democratic Party presidential candidate John Edwards’s extramarital affair, the relationship between Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama and his vice presidential running mate Joe Biden, failure of Republican Party candidate Rudy Giuliani’s presidential campaign and Sarah Palin’s vice presidential candidacy.
Game Change included several new assertions. . . Among them were the fact that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senator Chuck Schumer privately had urged Barack Obama to run for president in the fall of 2006, in hopes that it would energize the Democratic base and improve the party’s chances of winning the presidency. The book also detailed an hour-long meeting between Hillary Rodham Clinton and pollster Mark Penn, during which Clinton accused Obama of “playing the race card” and importing people into Iowa to improve his chances at the caucus. The book also alleges that Hillary Clinton wanted to make a bigger issue out of Obama’s drug use. . .”
Game Change also included reports about presidential candidate John Edwards’s handling of his affair with filmmaker Rielle Hunter before it was made public. According to the book, Edwards angrily rejected requests by his advisers to distance himself from Hunter.
The book also described in some depth, Sarah Palin’s role in John McCain’s campaign. In response to concerns that Palin was depressed and unresponsive to debate training, McCain reportedly suggested debate sessions for Palin be moved from Philadelphia to Sedona, Arizona, so Palin could be closer to her family. McCain aides reportedly were also concerned about Palin’s failure to understand basic facts prior to her ABC News interviews with Charles Gibson, including why North Korea and South Korea are separate countries. She also allegedly believed Saddam Hussein was behind the September 11 attacks.”
In a recent interview the authors defend their work which has come under criticism from Howard Dean (shown right) and Harry Reid. The authors responded, “We used an incredibly high standard” and “Many things were left out because we could not get enough verification” and “Everything in the book is the truth.”
“I didn’t like it, it was gossipy!”Howard Dean
If this was a “hit piece” designed to destroy Sarah Palin’s credibility, then there are simply too many other people held accountable besides Palin, she was just a small part of it. But, more importantly is the people who were critical of me for using this book as source material were not at all critical when we reported the negative parts about Harry Reid and his racial comments. I have to ask, if the book was credible when reporting on Harry, how is suddenly not credible when reporting on Sarah?
What is clear is the bias of Palin supporters and that is understandable. They have many good reasons to be supportive, but please don’t shoot the messenger. Yes there were some negative things said about her, but don’t just assume they were not true. There’s more reason to believe they were true than not. I would ask you folks to keep an open mind.
Let me make my position on Palin very clear. I don’t “hate” her as it’s been alleged. However, I do know what’s been reported about her, and I’ve watch her on TV, and listened to people that know her. From this info I have concluded Palin is an eloquent spokesperson, she supports all the issues near and dear to my heart, but she does not meet my standards for a President, ( nor does Barack Obama. ) That’s a far cry from saying I hate her.
The Palin supporters who have targeted me are trying to link the mainstream media’s bias to the authors noted and that’s not very fair without evidence. Then, when it suits them they turn around 180 degrees and use the authors book material on Reid and others.
I’ll try to restrain myself and be generous now…because normally these critics and I are on the same side of the fence. But, in my opinion this is. . . disingenuous. They have not introduced one single shred of credible evidence that Halperin and Heilemann have lied in their book about Palin. The evidence so far seems to say that it’s fair and balanced. Look at the writers backgrounds….these are not new authors looking for a cheap one time shot at stardom. Their reputations on the line every time they say anything political and they have been around for decades, why would they risk being untruthful when they have so much good (true) information?
You folks (my critics) have gone way out on a very skinny limb to make unfounded assertions against my position on Palin and at the same time, you’re trying to make a case that the people in the McCain camp ,for unknown reasons, hated Palin and made stuff up and the authors of this book also just made stuff up to discredit her. And the reason they would all do this? Because Palin is a pro-life Christian!? Hmmm…sorry, but that’s pretty weak. Let’s recap here, Harry Reid and Howard Dean don’t like the book – Sean Hannity said it was good. I’m on the Hannity side and Harry and Howard support your positions! lol Good luck with that!
Good book! Sean Hannity