Palin Stretches Truth about Plane on eBay

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BTW, does anybody know why John McCain had a picture of Walter Reed Middle School (located in North Hollywood, California) behind him during his speech?

(a) He loved the green background so much a few months ago that he wanted a rerun.
(b) The techie figured one place called Walter Reed is as good as another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is she planning to put Air Force Two on Ebay as well?

I think the whole point of this "Ebay" story is that she is all fluff and no substance. How will it take for Republicans to realize that emperor is naked?

Unfortunately, most of the media coverage of the election, and probably the majority of the votes, will be based on fluff rather than substance.

BTW, did you call her an emperor because the picture of her as a naked empress is too sexist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
This is probably TMI, but for me the significant aspect of the transaction is not how the jet actually sold or for how much. It's that she took the initiative to get the thing sold, and that she tried an innovative approach like eBay. This example is an attempt to show her priorities as governor -- not her knowlege of the resale jet market or her expertise as an eBay seller. Of course if either of the the two key parts of her statement were false -- if she's claiming credit for someone else's decision to sell it or if it never actually went up on eBay -- I'd add this to her list of lies. But given what I know now, I'm not offended by this particular statement.

Agree with PP on this but there is one thing bugging me. The Ebay thing could be considered innovative or it could be considered something a neophyte would do since an experienced leader perhaps would know the appropriate way to sell the jet. Not having been a governor, I don't know the answer to that. On the surface, though, it seems quite clever.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

During her address to the GOP convention, Palin said, "That luxury jet was over the top, I put it on eBay." In fact, while she did list it on eBay, it failed to sell.

Nobody met the minimum bid on eBay which was $2.5 million. Eventually, the plane was sold to an Alaskan businessman by an aircraft broker for $2.1 million.

Who cares where it actually sold. It sold. How is this stretching the truth - is she supposed to give a blow by blow description of the sales process? And does anyone really thing the governor was personally managing the sale?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:BTW, does anybody know why John McCain had a picture of Walter Reed Middle School (located in North Hollywood, California) behind him during his speech?

(a) He loved the green background so much a few months ago that he wanted a rerun.
(b) The techie figured one place called Walter Reed is as good as another.

Thanks for raising this. I thought it was one of his houses!

The other question I had was why they had him framed by first a green background and then a blue one. Neither background looked particularly good behind him.

[Anonymous]

From what I understand, the "blue background" was the blue sky with an American flag, but since all we saw was the tight shot of the speaker, all we saw was blue. If you were in the arena, I guess saw the whole flag. I do not know what the green was, but I suppose it is the same sort of thing. This was according to the MSNBC commentators after the speech.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The other question I had was why they had him framed by first a green background and then a blue one. Neither background looked particularly good behind him.

Yhe whole idea of putting that screen behind them was ill-considered. Between the moving images and pastel colors, it was usually quite distracting. I get that they wanted something visual to keep the audience in the arena awake, but they could have put a separate strip across the bottom, whether fixed or moving, that would look reasonable for the millions of us in the TV audience.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
Who cares where it actually sold. It sold. How is this stretching the truth - is she supposed to give a blow by blow description of the sales process? And does anyone really thing the governor was personally managing the sale?

Obviously, somebody feels the eBay part is important or they wouldn't have included it in the speech. It wouldn't be part of the mythology constantly spread about her. I don't know if she personally managed the sale or not. I do know that she said, "I put it on eBay."

Quite likely, the entire episode was nothing but a gimmick. Regardless of whether the decision to sell the plane was correct, it seems the Governor saw a lot of mileage in "putting it on eBay". Had that worked out, it might be worth all of the attention it received. However, since it didn't work out, but she still acts like it did, it seems the gimmicky part of the sale was more important to her than the actual sale.

I agree this is not the most important issue. But, it is emblematic of the candidate and the campaign. They spread the myth of the plane she sold on eBay, which is actually the plane she didn't sell on eBay. They say she opposed the Bridge to Nowhere, when she supported the Bridge to Nowhere. On and on.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Who cares where it actually sold. It sold. How is this stretching the truth - is she supposed to give a blow by blow description of the sales process? And does anyone really thing the governor was personally managing the sale?

Obviously, somebody feels the eBay part is important or they wouldn't have included it in the speech. It wouldn't be part of the mythology constantly spread about her. I don't know if she personally managed the sale or not. I do know that she said, "I put it on eBay."

Quite likely, the entire episode was nothing but a gimmick. Regardless of whether the decision to sell the plane was correct, it seems the Governor saw a lot of mileage in "putting it on eBay". Had that worked out, it might be worth all of the attention it received. However, since it didn't work out, but she still acts like it did, it seems the gimmicky part of the sale was more important to her than the actual sale.

I agree this is not the most important issue. But, it is emblematic of the candidate and the campaign. They spread the myth of the plane she sold on eBay, which is actually the plane she didn't sell on eBay. They say she opposed the Bridge to Nowhere, when she supported the Bridge to Nowhere. On and on.

Jeff, here's the thing. We don't really win by dwelling on things like this. Palin herself has said nothing inaccurate about the plane, or about putting it on eBay. McCain repeated the story and got it wrong, but that's not Palin's doing. And he probably won't do it again.

Here's the kind of thing that will happen if we focus on stuff like this. We criticize Palin for the eBay thing. We say it's emblematic of the candidate. Then McCain's camp comes back with something like this: "Barack Obama said in a speech, 'There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama, because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born. So don't tell me I don't have a claim on Selma, Alabama.' But Selma was in 1965; Obama was born in 1961. Obama is lying. This is emblematic of the candidate." There's a whole tit-for-tat process here that we don't want to get embroiled in. It doesn't help us. Focus on policy differences, especially in regard to McCain. Personal and character attacks on Palin will not win this for us.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
Jeff, here's the thing. We don't really win by dwelling on things like this. Palin herself has said nothing inaccurate about the plane, or about putting it on eBay. McCain repeated the story and got it wrong, but that's not Palin's doing. And he probably won't do it again.

I am not proposing that we dwell solely on the eBay story. As I have written repeatedly, Palin was virtually unknown to most Americans and was introduced with myth that was basically created out of whole cloth. That myth, in as few of words possible is that she is a hockey mom, reformer, who took on the old boys network. Elements of that myth are that she opposed the Bridge to Nowhere, supported earmark reform, improved ethics laws, balanced budgets, and sold the airplane on eBay." In reality, almost every element of the myth is false or a significant stretch of the truth.

I have listed all of these elements and documented how they are false or misleading, but nobody cares. I talk about the plane, and suddenly there is all kinds of response. The plane is easy to understand -- easier than the other issues.

Maybe I should have chose a different subject, but the point is that everything we have been told about this woman is misleading. Even something as basic as how she sold the airplane. Even that can't be believed.

We can't debate policy issues because she has not articulated a single policy. As Peggy Noonan was overhead saying through the open mic, the Republicans have chosen a "narrative". The narrative is what I've been calling the "myth". If we don't show that the narrative has no bearing in reality, the Republican strategy may well work.

[Anonymous]

Palin said many half-truths in her coming-out speech at the RNC. The Republicans are spinning a yarn and will be pulling it out of their asses over the next several weeks. Let's hope the media continues to do its due diligence and uncovers more than the Rep vetters could in a limited amount of time.

[Anonymous]

I think the challenge for Democrats is to create our own narrative about Palin that is not so positive in its mythology - or at least our own "elevator pitch" about her. Something like, "Being a working mother is commendable, but it's not preparation for representing the United States on the world stage" or

Simple, to the point, without attacking her as a woman or a mother (because that just makes the people who do identify with her feel defensive on her behalf...)

We Dems often get into this mindset of "we're right, so maybe if we just explain ourselves well enough people will come around..." mentality that leads us to fall into the trap of losing focus and becoming fact-checkers in the hope that it will help others see things the way we see them.

As someone who always wants to learn more and loves it when people explain things, I have learned the hard way in life that MOST people feel condescended to when someone explains something to them. I work in media relations and have to say that these details DO NOT MATTER to most people. (They matter to me, Jeff, because I am more like you in terms of how my mind works - so I always like reading your informative posts. But reality is that most people just don't care.)

What is MORE important - and what makes Palin a serious factor within this campaign - is that she comes across pretty well on television. She seems to many people like someone they can relate to - and that is what people take away from watching appearances in the media. They rarely listen to the content of what is said - although, if repeated often enough, a talking point or two will possibly stick with them. They listen and watch with their gut and come away with a "feeling" of whether or not they feel connected to the person at a human level. Sarah Palin, from her appearances to date, seems to have that particular talent. It is something that, for instance, it took a long time for Hillary Clinton to master as a skill and still is not a particular talent of hers - compare that to Barack Obama for whom it is simply an innate talent. It is a talent, also, that McCain lacks. But Palin appears to have it in spades. This makes her dangerous to Democrats.

Keep posting this stuff, Jeff. I enjoy it. At least it's amusing in a very scary time

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:I think the challenge for Democrats is to create our own narrative about Palin that is not so positive in its mythology - or at least our own "elevator pitch" about her.

Thank you for this post. Its is very helpful and I'd like to hear more about your ideas for an alternative narrative. I love to research and dig for details and then put them all together. Its very frustrating when nobody cares about the result. I could really benefit from hearing more of your ideas.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Thank you for this post. Its is very helpful and I'd like to hear more about your ideas for an alternative narrative. I love to research and dig for details and then put them all together. Its very frustrating when nobody cares about the result. I could really benefit from hearing more of your ideas.

No prob.

Check out my last piece on the Huffington Post site:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leah-mcelrath-renna/note-to-dems-forget-about_b_123889.html

Unfortunately, it got a bit buried in the avalanche of Palin coverage and didn't get much traction (plus I think referencing Audre Lorde in my title was a wee bit too esoteric to get most people's attention, lol).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Thank you for this post. Its is very helpful and I'd like to hear more about your ideas for an alternative narrative. I love to research and dig for details and then put them all together. Its very frustrating when nobody cares about the result. I could really benefit from hearing more of your ideas.

No prob.

Check out my last piece on the Huffington Post site:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leah-mcelrath-renna/note-to-dems-forget-about_b_123889.html

Unfortunately, it got a bit buried in the avalanche of Palin coverage and didn't get much traction (plus I think referencing Audre Lorde in my title was a wee bit too esoteric to get most people's attention, lol).

PP again.

And, as I am sure you have noticed, now the myth is that she sold the damn plane on e-Bay and "made a profit"! LOL. Despite being called out on the inaccuracies, McCain is going around telling this story for her and she continuing to tell it as well.