Raw Journolist emails on ‘Palin’s first miscue’

Adam Doster
Sept 8, 2008, 2:18pm

Misunderstanding housing
the midst of a major housing crisis …

Speaking before voters in Colorado Springs, the Republican vice presidential

> nominee claimed that lending giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had “gotten
> too big and too expensive to the taxpayers.” The companies, as McClatchy
> reported , “aren’t
> taxpayer funded but operate as private companies. The takeover may result in
> a taxpayer bailout during reorganization.”

Now, you can all jump on me about how I’m “underestimating VP Palin.” But really? The HuffPo hed is misleading — this is not a “gaffe”, it just shows her policy vapidness. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a lot more of these over the next two months.


Adam Serwer
Sept 8, 2008, 2:19pm

But she’s so AUTHENTIC! Authentic non-elitist Americans don’t worry about this stuff, they worry about how to teach their kids how to shoot m-16s and use withdrawal as birth control.

Harold Pollack
Sept 8, 2008, 2:22pm

That quote is too general to be damaging. It would take Dean or Doug Holtz-Eakin about 30 seconds to interpret Palin’s comment in a policy-plausible way.

Adele Stan
Sept 8, 2008, 2:37pm

this is not a gaffe. it’s more likely a lie. suits her big-govt-out-to-screw-ya narrative. and harold’s right; this is too easy for the average voter to accept.

don’t mistake palin as a stupid hick. she’s pretty smart..

Dana Goldstein
Sept 8, 2008, 2:42pm

Agree with Harold. And what’s more, this is something McCain or any other Republican (Romney) would totally say. Sure, they got too big and dependent — dependent on the taxpayers for a bailout. We may not agree with the ideology behind the statement, but it’s no proof of Palin’s particular ignorance.

Harold Pollack
Sept 8, 2008, 2:44pm

On Adele’s “hick” front, I would emphasize that it’s Palin’s small-mindedness, not her small-town roots, we find so appalling. Hubert Humphrey hailed from Wallace, South Dakota, Harry Truman from Lamar, Missouri, Jimmy Carter from Plains, Georgia.John Edwards, etc.

Ezra Klein
Sept 8, 2008, 2:46pm

I think you are all reading the quote too closely and giving the context too little weight. When McCain gave the first part of his speech before Walter Reed High, it was fine. If Obama had done it, it would’ve ended the election. Similarly, Palin can’t be seen to be unaware of what shes talking about right now, even if the actual issue is technical. The subject, in other words, is only important so much as it gives folks time to talk about the deeper failing.

  • Pingback: BizzyBlog

  • ImRubberYoureGlue

    Thank you Katha Pollitt for having the integrity to stand up to your ethically-challenged colleagues here and in the discussion on Sarah/Bristol/Trig Palin!

  • JSBrad

    Funny thing about these JourNOlista hacks, is they know little about Fannie and Freddie. They are known as GSE’s (Govenment sponsored enterprises). Yes the stock is as a private owned company but it was created by our Government for many reasons. Before Palin made her statement the Gov. unwisely said they were thinking on taking over or rescueing the failing entities. These JouNolistas are not only dishonest but they are also stupid. And have you heard they are racists as well.

  • Ezra

    Looks like they’re trying to bring the JournoList back up. Check it out at:

    I don’t think they’ve figured out yet that it’s not set to private.

    • pink

      The teabonic misspellings immediately tip this off as an attempt at humor by someone on the right.

      • Estarcaths

        Teabonic. What does that even mean? Are you implying that anyone who might belong to one o the various tea party groups is, by default, a moron?

        In light of your comment below, is it wise to make general assumptions about large groups of people? And, if it is ethically and intellectually correct to do so, why shouldn’t anyone who reads the Daily Caller articles concerning the Journolist postings just simply assume that most, if not all, journalists are partisan hacks, particularly those that signed up to participate in the Journolist forum?

        • theprofessor

          “Teabonic. What does that even mean? ”

          Exactly what it looks like – ‘pink’ is an troll that goes about criticizing everybody’s spelling while misspelling, complaining about people calling other people names while calling people names, and complaining about people using insults while insulting someone.

          There’s obviously a mental disconnect in this one.

  • tdpwells

    David Roberts: There simply is nothing on the left like the partisan media on the right. The left has no media soldiers, only ironically distanced media observers. “Dems should do this. Dems should do that. Why isn’t Obama saying this? Why isn’t Obama saying that?” All from a great height, with great detachment.


    What world is he living in?? Good God, that might be the most delusional statement I’ve read throughout this entire coverage. No media soldiers?? LOLOLOLOL!!!!

  • pink

    It would be more honest to post the affiliation along with the name. Which are news reporters, which are opinion writers, which are academics?

    By lumping all these posts together, you’re wanting us to believe all the posters are “journalists” when they’re not. In these posts it’s the commentators and academics who seem to wander over the line into wishing for message coordination. But then there is no line for them — they’re not journalists and are not bound by the same ethics journalists should be held accountable for.

    I think it’s really dishonest of Daily Caller not to post the affiliation along with the poster’s name.

    • Estarcaths

      Really? How difficult is it to investigate that stuff yourself? That isn’t the point, though, is it? The point you are trying to make is not to assume every participant on the list is some hard left ideologue looking to score political points in reputable newspapers and magazines. While it is a valid point, a valid question to ask is this: how smart was it for the real journalists to involve themselves in discussions in this forum in the first place? This is most definitely not a list devoted to, say, learning and applying best practices in journalism. Instead, it is a discussion forum dedicated to those with a certain political ideology who happen to be journalists or bloggers.

      For someone in a job in which objectivity is a professional requirement, did it really make sense to sign themselves up for this? It certainly does not look good, whatever the facts may be.

    • theprofessor

      “they’re not journalists and are not bound by the same ethics journalists should be held accountable for.”

      Of course we all know that two days before the list was released, they were all touting about how they were “journalists” in the new media. On Tuesday : “How dare you not be consider us “journalists”!!!” By Thursday: ” We aren’t journalists!! We are academics and opinion writers and and ,,,,what?”

  • IndependentVet

    Given what we now know about the bailout of Fannie/Freddie, it would seem Adam Doster is the one whose “vapidness” is on display for starting this “discussion”.

  • memomachine


    These truly are reprehensible people.