Colorado blogger Adam Brickley has been given credit in many quarters -- and on Comedy Central's The Colbert Report -- for helping to boost Alaska governor Sarah Palin into the Republican vice presidential slot via his website, PalinForVP.blogspot.com. But following Palin's widely derided series of interviews with ABC's Charles Gibson and (especially) CBS' Katie Couric, her frequently satirized performance in the vice presidential debate versus Democrat Joe Biden, and the criticism that's come her way for strident and divisive stump speeches, has Brickley moderated his advocacy? Hell, no. He thinks Palin's kicking ass, and he's not shy about explaining why.
In his October 3 entry, "The Day After," Brickley argued that Palin scored a resounding victory over Biden in the debate even if the two of them actually tied due to "low expectations" and the fact that "hardly anyone mentioned Joe Biden in the run-up. Far more people tuned in to watch her than her opponent, so she probably got more attention from the audience." He added his belief that "the unedited Sarah is far better than the unethical, cut-and-spliced travesties that Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric presented (and no, I don't think that's putting it to [sic] harshly after reading the unedited transcripts). This should provide a lesson to the McCain campaign that LIVE interviews are a [sic] absolute necessity for Sarah."
Three days later, in "SarahCuda vs. The Associated Press," Brickley defended Palin against suggestions that she's been subtly playing the race card. First, he reprinted a passage from an AP story critical of the governor:
Palin's words avoid repulsing voters with overt racism. But is there another subtext for creating the false image of a black presidential nominee "palling around" with terrorists while assuring a predominantly white audience that he doesn't see their America?
He then cut it apart as follows:
Read that again very carefully. Essentially, they said that she did nothing racial at all, but merely that she dared to suggest that Senator Obama is anything less than a divine gift to America. If this paradigm were applied across the board, EVERY criticism of Obama would be labeled racism. Using that definition, it is literally impossible to say anything negative about the Senator from Illinois without committing a racist act.
Think about that for a second -- let it sink in. According the the AP, NOBODY CAN EVER SAY ANYTHING BAD ABOUT BARACK OBAMA.
Friends, that's not just unjournalistic... it's downright Orwellian.
Finally, in October 13's "Great 'Troopergate' Response," Brickley dismissed a report suggesting that Palin had behaved unethically in working behind the scenes to sack public safety commissioner William Monegan, her former brother-in-law:
It's a bit of a slow news day, and I don't have much time. However, before I forget, I wanted to quickly direct you to the response to the Branchflower report issued by Gov. Palin's lawyers. It turns the entire investigation on its head by asserting (credibly) that Sen. Hollis French, Sen. Lyda Green, and "investigator" Steve Branchflower are themselves in violation of Alaska's ethics laws. It also makes a plausible case for "abuse of power" on the part of Senators Green and French due to their use of public money to finance a labor union's vendetta against the governor. I really enjoyed reading such a thorough smackdown against the anti-Palin lynch mob, and I feel that I would be doing you disservice if I didn't make sure that all of your read it.
Good to know that the blogosphere's original true believer in Palin remains so enthusiastically in her camp. -- Michael Roberts