MSNBC’s Norah O’Donnell Grills Little Girl Over Palin Support – UPDATED!

November 20th, 2009 By: CFN | Tags:

I have seen low, but wow this takes the cake. O’Donnell is engaging in a half truth.

YouTube Preview Image

And now for the truth..

Sarah Palin opposed the bailouts and has stated so. Sarah Palin was the VICE-presidential candidate which means that if the Presidential candidate takes a position so do you. Anyone who accepts the VP nomination knows this. Palin went back to her own views after the campaign was over.

Joe Biden had some different policy positions than Obama, Biden conformed.

Dick Cheney had disagreements with President Bush, especially on Scooter Libby and standing up to the administrations critics. Cheney conformed until he was out of office and is now on the offensive (and his approval numbers are going up).

John Edwards was more hawkish than John Kerry, Edwards conformed to the ticket.

Joe Lieberman had a great many policy differences with Al Gore, especially on Social Security policy, national defense and environmental policy. Lieberman argued for Al Gore’s positions in the debates. Lieberman assumed his old policy positions after the campaign was over. Did MSNBC find a little girl Lieberman supporter to grill over it?

Al Gore was further to the left than Bill Clinton, it is well known that they didn’t get along. Gore played the VP role as the VP role is expected to.

Dan Quayle had domestic policy differences with President Bush 41. I know this because I have talked with VP Quayle about this very subject. Quayle is a Reaganite and Bush 41 never was.

Bush 41 had differences with President Reagan.

LBJ hated JFK and reversed many of his policy positions after JFK was murdered.

Question of the day: why the double standard when it comes to former VP candidate Palin?

Cross posted at IUSB Vision.

UPDATE – Norah O still going after young girl. Hotair.com has details HERE. Red, White and Conservative has more HERE.

Author’s Note – This really does speak volumes about just how off the beaten path MSNBC has become. They have just created a new “Joe the Plumber” and now they have to destroy this girl as fast as they can before she becomes a full blown celebrity.

Norah and you quacks at MSNBC should pick on someone your own age. If you want to debate someone so bad why don’t you try someone like this writer (Chuck Norton) or our Editor in Chief Micheal who have some training in journalism, economics and poli sci? Of course the answer is obvious, right now you are debating a child and you are still losing, as today the young girl has come up with the same answer I presented above.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Jay_C
    November 20th, 2009 at 22:18
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Thanks for that CFN,

    It is amazing how far those with P.D.S. will go. I saw at another progressive site, people making fun of the girl and the guy in the video correcting themselves on the words they chose, with a conversation thread about this for about 25 entries, it was really sad to see a focus on such minutiae.. It is also sad to see, like you said, P.D.S-ers playing “gotcha” with what Palin said during the campaign running for VP (as you pointed out this is what all VP’s do while running), vs. what she really believes, now that her “campaign muzzle” has been removed. Why can’t they talk about her stances…POST muzzling? Naw, now they will talk about anything but that.

    On top of that, she is now “dangerous” as well..

    “GQ Magazine is telling a tale of two leaders. On the one side you have Barack Obama, champion of the left, leader of the mainstream media; GQ’s Leader of the Year. On the other side you have Sarah Palin, pariah of the right, dangerous and poisonous to the American way according to an interview in the very same publication….Think I’m kidding? I couldn’t make this garbage up.”

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/terry-trippany/2009/11/19/gq-magazine-barack-obama-leader-year-sarah-palin-dangerous-poisonous

    “In a fundraising e-mail sent out Friday, Organizing for America — the community organizing component of the DNC founded in the wake of Barack Obama’s inauguration — said it is aiming to raise $500,000 in the next week “to help push back against Sarah Palin and her allies.”

    “Right now, Sarah Palin is on a highly publicized, nationwide book tour, attacking President Obama and his plan for health reform at every turn,” says the e-mail, signed by OFA Director Mitch Stewart. “It’s dangerous. Remember, this is the person who coined the term ‘Death Panels’ — and opened the flood gates for months of false attacks by special interests and partisan extremists.”

    http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/20/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5723675.shtml

    Ooooh, book tours and opinions…. very VERY dangerous!!! God I hate hypocrisy!

    And furthermore, whatever happened to…

    “I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you’re not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration.” Hillary Clinton

  2. Jeb
    November 20th, 2009 at 23:48
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Grilling seems too strong a characterization of what O’Donnell did. She asked a question, the girl engaged, then she followed up. Neither the girl nor her father seemed put off and the girl handled herself quite well. I don’t agree with her (parents) expressed opinions but she is definitely on the more politically articulate end of middle schoolers and should be proud of her performance as I am sure her family is.

  3. Liam Steele
    November 21st, 2009 at 01:07
    Reply | Quote | #3

    I think Nora should be very proud of herself, she beat up on a middle schooler. Right on baby, that will put this chick in her place, how dare she have an opinion that is contrary to the left wing hatchet bitches.

  4. Greg Clark
    November 21st, 2009 at 04:40
    Reply | Quote | #4

    Real good, Norah. Ambushing a 17-year old; I’m sure your camera crew was high-fiving you after this coup. Shows you that degrees from Georgetown don’t guarantee class. I wouldn’t mind if O’Donnell would also do this to an Obamanoid at some point, but don’t hold your breath.

  5. J.K.
    November 21st, 2009 at 22:09
    Reply | Quote | #5

    Wow talk about your bias reporting. I watched the interview and saw this woman try to trip up a child and walk away when an adult made sense clearly stating what the young lady could not articulate. And then she made a totally insulting and unsubstantiated false statement about Sarah Palin supporters not understanding the issues! One issue that needs to be fixed is the slanderous and bias reporting of the liberal media!

    What ever happened to integrity in reporting? I gues sit died when a solcialist ran for president.

  6. Jack
    November 23rd, 2009 at 23:33
    Reply | Quote | #6

    I get embarrassed watching PSMSNBC at this point. They barely have an audience anymore, and it will continue to evaporate as long as condescending hacks like O’Donnell and
    Shuster are given free reign there.

  7. Jo S
    January 21st, 2010 at 12:51
    Reply | Quote | #7

    Oh my God …you are so right!!. O'Donnell is a hack to the nth degree but yet MSNBC keeps her around. Do you ever wonder why? I certainly do! I think we should check DNA on her 3 children to see who they really belong to…..what a way to keep a job!! Just doing some O'Donnell type reporting and what will it get me? Certainly not the money she's making and my story probably has more truth to it than O'Donnell's pieces! Jo S

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.