Newsweek's absolutely disgusting puff-peice on Palin...

[Erose999]

I guess that narcissistic twit Palin won't allow anybody to use her trademarked surname unless they agree to write favorable press.

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/07/10/palin-plots-her-next-move.html

This article was written without a single shred of scrutiny. One can just sense the doe-eyed adoration the writer has for Palin. So much fucking sugar in that cotton candy of an article that I think I'm gonna go into a diabetic coma.

BLECK!! Vomit!!!

[villager]

1. interesting this had an unrec -- though the unreccers here are generally of the ilk

...that might be construed as "Palinesque..."

[snooper2]

2. I think the usage of twat is probably the reason...

[Erose999]

4. fixed n/t

[dionysus]

5. i was surprised to find that brits use that word in common speech. here... uh not so much...

[villager]

6. point -- more helpful if the unreccer states as much?

:shrug:

[Cirque du So-What]

9. Coulda been worser...

...but no less accurate.

[dionysus]

3. jesus, there's 8 pages of this shit!

[Erose999]

7. Why waste 8 pages about her when there are about 10 candidates who have formally declared? lol

I guess "Santorum" doesn't sell magazines... or maybe just the ones behind the counter that come wrapped in a brown paper bag. LOL

[Maru Kitteh]

14. Because they're all boring as shit-colored paint drying on a wall.

That's my guess.

[eilen]

8. I would think that her name being trademarked

would be a great reason NOT to write and publish articles about her.

[Buns_of_Fire]

15. She trademarked "1/2-a-Governor Mooseburger"? (tm)

Or was it "Caribou Barbie" (tm) ?

Can't be "That Woman is an Idiot" (tm) -- I think Keith O. has already claimed that one. Tina Fey has already locked up "Fancy Pageant Walkin'" (tm).

[Bonhomme Richard]

10. They are only trying to extend her 15 minutes because.....

it is good for the bottom line.

[LynnTTT]

11. Desperation

I have subscribed to Newsweek for at least 25 years... can't really remember. In the past 2 years the issues got smaller and for the last year I have been expecting to see Paris Hilton on the cover. It will be gone in less than a year I suspect

[Maru Kitteh]

12. In that first photo, it looks like she has a load in her pants.

The camera. It does not lie.

[ChoppinBroccoli]

13. I Say LET THEM Build Her Up

I've never seen a LESS electable candidate, with the possible exception of just about every other Republican seeking the 2012 nomination. Sarah Failin's got a better shot at being elected the President of MENSA than she does President of the United States.

[HockeyMom]

16. I really hate Republican WOMEN

Don't like Republican men either, but the women really gall me.

They are a disgrace in my book. You couldn't pay me to ever vote for any of them.

[muriel_volestrangler]

17. Related: "Newsweek.com Will Cease to Exist on July 19"

Right now if you go to newsweek.com, you'll see a basic magazine website, updated with content from the print version of the mag and a top navigation bar that directs you to content on its sister site, dailybeast.com. But starting July 19, we hear, newsweek.com will no longer exist. Instead that URL will redirect users to a channel on the Daily Beast site, like its current "politics," "entertainment," and "fashion" verticals. The Newsweek channel will still have all the archived magazine content from before (unlike Time, Newsweek puts all of its print content online), and it will be edited and updated once a day to rotate features. Newsweek/Daily Beast editor Tina Brown and Chief Digital Officer Daniel Blackman decided it made the most sense to have all-new non-magazine content appear on the Beast homepage. As it is, that's how the system has been working for some weeks now, but the death of the newsweek.com URL marks the official end of what was once a fully staffed and hugely trafficked site in its own right.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/07/newsweekcom_will_cease_to_exis.html

More like "entertainment" and "fashion", and not much like "politics", I'd say.

That piece is a hagiography. I can't believe a former news magazine has written something quite so adoring about such an obviously flawed and divisive human being. It reads like something out of Hello magazine.