Since the Palin speech was only mediocre, is the media just trying to make up for their gossip?

Question

...by pretending to believe that Palin's speech was really good?

Answer 1

>>the Palin speech was only mediocre<<

That is your opinion, and you are entitled to it, but it is not shared by everyone. Many people think the speech was wonderful.

Answer 2

no, her speech really was very good.  especially when you consider that her teleprompter did not work correctly.  Would love to have seen barak pull that one off.

Answer 3

Mediocore?  She crushed you Libs.

Answer 4

Well there are a few reasons.

1) It was well-delivered.  She cracked some jokes, made some wiseass sarcastic comments, etc.  It was entertaining.  Now, was there any substance in the speech?  Not in the least.  She spent more time lying about her credentials and Obama's experience than addressing how she and McCain plan to fix our country's problems (i.e. economy, health care, Iraq, etc.).

However, the praise of the speech is all based on charisma.  After all, Palin didn't even write the speech.  The only role she played was in delivering it, and in that she did a good job.  The speech itself was garbage, but that's Bush's speechwriter's fault.

2) The media has taken a lot of heat for pointing out Palin's flaws.  There was a poll saying that 51% of voters think the media is trying to hurt Palin with their news coverage.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/rasmussen/200809...

Whenever the media gets criticized like that, they usually fold like a map.  When Hillary and Bill complained that Obama was getting a free pass, the media started criticizing him a lot more.  So they now bend over backwards to praise Palin because she was able to get through the speech without misspelling 'potato'.

Answer 5

No.

The speech was good..

your question is mediorcre

Answer 6

yes, i agree.it was an ok speech.would have been nice to hear about the economy,healthcare,and education.all bash not substance.

Answer 7

Don't believe the stupid teleprompter excuse, that never happened and nobody has any proof it did.

Answer 8

Overrated and bias.

Her speech provided the first serious glimpse at what turned out to be an unadulteratedly neoconservative position on foreign policy: ~~a year old video of her declaring the Iraq War a task from God notwithstanding.~~

Twice in her speech, ~~she declared victory in Iraq to be “within sight”~~, and praised Senator McCain for having the “sheer guts” to defend the unpopular war though many predicted it would cost him voter support. She likewise lauded McCain’s war experience and chastised her Democrat opponents for their lack of military service. ~~She also claimed that McCain had been granted special wisdom and compassion from his service and detention “by the grace of God”.~~

Beyond Iraq, the Alaska Governor appeared to see threats everywhere, cautioning the crowd against “dangerous foreign powers” who don’t have America’s best interest at heart. ~~She accused Russia of “wanting to control a vital pipeline in the Caucasus,” presumably referring to the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, though the recent war with Georgia did not leave Russia in control of any territory near this pipeline.~~ She also said Russia was “using energy as a weapon,” in a segment of her speech focused on energy independence.

~~She also promised “to confront the threat that Iran might seek to cut off nearly a fifth of world energy supplies,” though Iran has only threatened to do this if they are attacked. ~~Presumably also referring to Iran, she spoke of “terrorist states” which are “seeking nuclear weapons without delay,” and condemned Democratic presidential nominee Barrack Obama for saying he would meet with them without preconditions.

~~Finally, she warned that terrorists may disrupt Saudi Arabia’s oil supply, and warned that al-Qaeda “still plot(s) to inflict catastrophic harm on America,” while mocking Obama for being “worried that someone won’t read ‘em their rights”.~~

Answer 9

Did you miss the speech?!  

Answer 10

No, it was actually really good!!

Answer 11

I don't know but it does seem strange that the media is doling out so much praise for such an empty speech.  

Answer 12

The vast majority think it was very good, on both sides.  If it was really mediocre, we wouldn't be talking about it.  There were a bunch of mediocre speakers yesterday and no one is talking about them.

A minority think Palin's speech was mediocre.  And thats fine.  More in the middle think it was good, but lacked effectiveness and won't yield any results in the end.  That's fine too.

A small fringe blinded minority actually think it was "horrible".  What can we say.  She was not attempting to reach the small fringe, blinded voter.

Answer 13

You've got to be kidding.  Her speech was dynamic and beyond really good.  Guess nothing any conservative does will be good enough for you yet you're more than willing to accept a man who stumbles all over the place without his prompter helping him.  Talk about a mediocre speaker.  But keep trying.  I'm sure you'll stumble across something of substance, Nah!