I am very excited about watching HBO movie “Game Change” on Saturday evening, which details Sarah Palin’s rise and fall as John McCain’s running mate. As in real life, she will come
across as an incompetent buffoon. The movie has a star-studded cast:
Julianne Moore plays Ms. Palin and Woody Harrelson plays the campaign manager Steve Schmidt in the film, which was written by Danny Strong and directed by Jay Roach. In some scenes Ms. Palin is depicted as a inspirational leader who impressed campaign staffers with her Republican National Convention speech; in many other scenes she is portrayed as unable to answer basic political questions.
Just how ignorant and unprepared was Palin? A New York Times reviewer writes:
In the film, while Ms. Palin prepares for her first television interview, Mr. Schmidt asks her, “Governor, do you know what the Fed is?” and she stares blankly at him. When he asks, “Governor, do you know why we’re in Iraq?,” she says, incorrectly, “Because Saddam Hussein attacked us on 9/11.” Then Mr. Schmidt says to a senior adviser to Ms. Palin, Nicolle Wallace, “Well, she’s a great actress, right?” Ms. Wallace answers, “The best,” and he says, “Why don’t we just give her some lines?”
Needless to say, Sarah Palin is apoplectic about the movie:
In a Fox News interview on Saturday, Ms. Palin cast the film as a product of a “pro-leftist, pro-Barack Obama machine,” and added, “Hollywood lies are Hollywood lies.” The film, they assert, was conceived by Hollywood liberals to undermine a future run for president by Ms. Palin, who has pre-emptively attacked the film as a work of fiction, though she says she has not seen it.
Well, there you go. Palin is going off on a film she has not seen. Once again, she has much to say, with much bombast, without doing her basic homework. Grab your popcorn, folks, this should be fun!!!
She reminds me of the right wing mouth breathers who always want to ban library books and films that they haven’t even read or seen because the Leader of the Borg Collective told them that it was ‘bad’, ‘dirty’, ‘pro-gay’ or whatever…
PS…who cares how the movie makes her look, politically she’s toast and history anyway.
Im not surprised, remember how the religious right attacked “The last Temptation of Christ” without having seen it.
emma,
we had the same thing in this country where the BBC decided to screen ‘Jerry Springer: the Musical’, which depicted a rather fat, camp Jesus in a diaper. Stephen Green (our version of Porno Pete) and his ‘Christian Voice’ got very angry at this, protesting outside the BBC and the west-end theatre, and went so far as to threaten the BBC2 controller and post his home address and phone number on their website, which led to more threatening behaviour by these ‘Christian’ zealots.
Turned out, when asked, NOT ONE of these protesters had actually seen the play, or indeed knew much about it apart from that it had a scene that featured a ‘less than complimentary’ depiction of Jesus.
Seem these right wingers are all getting frothed up about what MIGHT happen, rather than what HAS happened.
It’s the same with Obama. If you listen to what most of these fundagelicals are saying about him, most of it is centred not around what he HAS done, but what they think he MIGHT do. (destroy western civilisation, implement a socialist eutopia, implement sharia law, destroy religion etc)
And gay marriage. They do not point to what HAS happened in countries or states that have marriage equality, but what they think MIGHT happen if it becomes ubiquitous (it will lead to polygamy, kids being inducted into the gay lifestyle, less hetero marriage, the collapse of society as we know it… etc)
It’s all just irrational fears whipped up into a fury and exacerbated by charismatic speakers and the limited IQ of those who subscribe to such a fire-and-brimstone viewpoint of the world.
I actually don’t think Sarah P is “toast” quite yet. I am pretty sure she is biding her time to see how the carnage from this election plays out. She is young, charismatic to a certain type of the populace, and can be patient for 2016. Americans have short memories (look at Gingrich and Santorum!), so I wouldn’t be surprised to find she is getting herself positioned for the future.
Yeah, right, it’s this movie that’s standing in the way of her being president.
Paul, she is never going to be toast because this particular slice of white bread declines and is going to continue to decline to place herself in the toaster. When she resigned as governor of Alaska that was the end of her political career. She is going to continue doing what she is doing now: giving speeches for money and cheerleading. Her laziness and ignorance are not any detriment to her in this role, but her acting skills, as the script for this film suggests, are a real boon.
She’s clever, like P.T. Barnum. She manipulated her panting admirers into believing she really was a contender for the presidency, all while hauling in millions of dollars from those suckers and the media that feed them. Then, as the primary season actually began, she quietly disappeared. If Obama is reelected, I suspect she will do it all over again.
If she ever hopes to be a serious contender, she needs to stop looking out her window at Russia, and hire an awesome team of tutors that have an exceedingly high tolerance for frustration.
She doesn’t hope to be a serious contender. She hopes to look like one.
Her family’s main business right now, in the midst of the GOP primary, is selling reality shows. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the whole mangy clan repossessing cars on TruTV in a year.