Palin at #2 (0.00 / 0)

may just show that more people then we think are impressed with women of valor.

Or it may also indicate name recognition.  

But sadly, it may tell us what we already know, that is that the media seldom recognizes women for admirable charactics - just whether they are dogs or filty rich or babes.

And more sadly, neither do most women.

---

by: twandx @ Sat Dec 27, 2008 at 04:57:00 AM CST

Both names at the top mean (0.00 / 0)

... people don't think the way the major media tell them to. Hillary and Palin are completely contrary to the false narrative constructed by the pampered elite.

It's not quite clear what's happening, but sometime early this year, non-Obama supporting Americans began to ignore media messages, and see right through bias, as if it were transparent as glass.

---

by: Pacific John @ Sat Dec 27, 2008 at 12:06:23 PM CST

[ Parent | ]

well, (0.00 / 0)

SOME people don't think the way the media tells them; too many do, which is why Obama is president-elect....

---

by: Sharyn @ Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 12:35:08 PM CST

[ Parent | ]

I'm glad to see this, and I agree with you, PJ. (0.00 / 0)

Campskunk, thank you so much for pointing this out.  (I only just found this.)  I am very glad that we have more people who recognize Senator Clinton's admirable qualities in this country than I'd previously thought -- and that at least some of us can, as PJ said so eloquently, look past the media narrative and see through bias, "as if it were transparent as glass."

There's no excuse for this, DNC.  None.

---

by: LSekhmet @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 22:13:30 PM CST

[ Parent | ]