The point is, anyone objective could legitimately be skewering Palin far more than has been done -- on her record, rhetoric, and constant manipulations.
This is a far different matter than sexism. And when it has even minimally been done, Palin has falsely accused her critics of precisely such sexism and other irrelevancies, using her rhetoric much like a bludgeon. And the media have played right into it. (Speaking of which; here, the winners of our sellout of the year club, giving voice to the "genius" that is Sarah Palin. We'll address the blatant manipulations in this energy and logic obscenity laced piece, a bit later.)
Of course, this is the same person, who when skeptics noted that the then vice presidential nominee's experience was limited to 20 months as governor of a state with a population under that of many small cities, and had been major of a town of around 6800, viciously wielded this same rhetoric like a weapon, vociferously claiming that they and "the media" were "attacking small town America;" Or that, in a pejorative context, then candidate (and now President) Obama was "not like you or I." Frighteningly misleading rhetoric, that.
By the way, what other famous historical rhetoritician used such type of "not like you or I" logic?
This was also a person who could not name one single news source that she read. Who held open political rallies where secret service blocked reporter's access to everyday citizens; whose own presidential campaign staffers, fairly or not, have expressed grave concerns over her, and was found by the Alaska Legislature to have "abused her powers" as Governor, and mislead about it after the fact; allegedly claimed dinosaurs and humans once coexisted (a claim that was never refuted by Palin); couldn't cite a single Supreme Court case other than Roe v. Wade; just like she repeatedly claimed that she opposed the "bridge to nowhere" when she had been a vocal supporter until it became a national boondoogle and Congress made it clear Alaska was not getting another dime for the project; boasted to Americans how she called for divestiture of Alaska investments in Sudan,when in fact it was her administration that blocked the bill calling for divestiture; lashed out at "Washington's 'good 'ole boy' network" while back at home taking such nepotism, cronyism, and favoritism to new heights; when explaining her foreign policy credentials because "Alaska is close to Russia" mysteriously claimed "we have trade missions back and forth;" labeled herself an energy expert yet claimed that Alaska "produces nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy" when in fact Alaska produces about 1/7th of that amount; as major tried to fire a librarian who wouldn't cooperate with her untoward, and multiple inquiries ("on behalf of a constituent") as to how to ban books; presided as major over the billing of rape victims for evidence gathering exams; campaigned for vice president on an anti federal pork platform, but as major went so far as to use taxpayer money to hire a lobbying firm, in raising almost 27 million dollars in federal money, for a town that averaged around 6,800 residents; did very well to distinguish us from our enemies, by proclaiming that soldiers in Iraq were on a "task from God;" etc.
But of course, how bad can she be, she is going to campaign for Democrats! What open mindedness. We'll see how many she actually campaigns for. We're pretty sure it will be zero. Of course, if she is really clever and wants to play the "skewering media" and voters like a fiddle, she actually will campaign for one, just for show.