I want to see this movie


Here’s a review of “The Undefeated” by Nicole Coulter at C4P:

As you’re already aware, the film sheds light on many details about Alaska, oil, gas, taxes, budgets, corruption fighting, bi-partisan teamwork, privatizing dairy farms, infrastructure projects, ethics reform, and federal sting operations.

In other words, all the things Palin detractors say she would be too stupid to know anything about.

This is not a lightweight film. It’s not a date-night flick or E! True Hollywood story. It requires full attention, a sober mind, and two-hour time commitment. Governor Palin’s story may be inspirational, but it’s also a tad wonky. And that busts quite a few false memes right off the bat.

The one part that especially grabbed my husband was the brief montage at the very beginning showcasing Hollywood’s maniacal hatred of Sarah Palin. It was an ugly, yet strangely fascinating display of vulgarity that perhaps should have been better explained. It was jarring to go from Madonna screaming out obscenities about Sarah Palin to suddenly seeing Heath family home movies, and a discussion of how Palin spearheaded Wasilla sewer and road projects. And that’s probably the point Bannon was attempting to make. There’s just no rationale for the venom.

Having very little understanding, obviously, of what I do all day every day at C4P, my non-political husband innocently asks, “Why do they hate her? What did Sarah Palin ever do to them? Is it her policies? What?

Exactly.

After watching the first 60 minutes or so of wonky, ethical, bi-partisan Sarah Palin, my husband’s conclusion? “There’s nothing about her record that they could hate so much. They hate her only because she opposes the one they love … Barack Obama.”


Okay, Nicole Coulter is obviously a fan of Sarah Palin so you have to take her opinion with a grain of salt. But she touches on something we all noticed a long time ago – some people on the left completely lose their shit over Sarah.

I’ve only seen two other politicians who cause that kind of an irrational reaction, and both of them are named Clinton.

Sarah is not Bill or Hillary – their politics are very different. Sarah is not as wonky as the Clintons, but she’s no airhead. She has something that can’t be taught or faked – presence. She lights up crowds.

We’ve all seen her on stage and we’ve seen the caricature of her the media keeps trying to portray. What we haven’t seen until now is a good look at the Sarah Palin who existed before John McCain named her as his running mate. That Sarah must have done something right to get an 88% approval rating.

Unless the movie goes national I’ll probably have to wait for the DVD – which will probably come out just in time for the Iowa caucuses. If any of you see it sooner please give us your reviews.


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to I want to see this movie

  1. votermom says:

    I hope Netflix streams it — if they get dvds then the obots are going to damage the disks, I betcha.

    The C4Pers are really excited about the Iowa premiere tomorrow – they are hoping a lot of supporters who up even without tickets.

  2. ralphb says:

    I want to see this film. I’ve read nothing but good things about it. One of the things the first half apparently does is bolster the competent image formed by her emails.

  3. The hatred clearly has nothing to do with Sarah herself, or her family, or really even her politics. It has to do with the fact that she was up against “the one”, Obama.

    And this should tell you everything you need to know about her power, they felt that way towards her, running as VP, not as much towards McCain. Kaboom.

    • 1539days says:

      McCain really wasn’t the opposition in 2008. I don’t know if he was too much into playing his part or he was so obsessed with “fair” elections he didn’t want to say anything that would be construed as dirty. Regrdless, he fought harder for his Senate seat in 2010. Sarah had to help him win that, too.

  4. Dario says:

    If it gets a good response from the public, it may have wide distribution. I hope so because I want to see it too.

    • And clearly it’s not politics here either since he went after Hillary and her daughter in similar ways. He’s kind of got a problem with women. Duh.

    • ralphb says:

      NYTimes guest on Maher…

      New York Times columnist David Carr responds to Bill Maher implying Alabama and Kansas are not the “smart states.”

      David Carr: “If it’s Kansas, Missouri, no big deal. You know, that’s the dance of the low-sloping foreheads. The middle places, right? [pause] Did I just say that aloud?”

      http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/06/24/nyts_david_carr_middle_places_home_of_low_sloping_foreheads.html

      • Anonymous says:

        The creative class elitists at the NYTimes and NBC should never be allowed to select and actively campaign for a US Potus candidate again. Thankfully bith Bill Keller and Jeff Zucker have been booted from their jobs. I wouldn’t shed a tear if both outlets went out of business. Tyranny of NYC snobs. The nation is better off without it. Now I’m off to Central Central..

  5. WMCB says:

    I plan to see it.

  6. Valissa says:

    Looking forward to seeing the movie!

    I also wanna try this 🙂

    Move over funnel cakes, fried Kool-Aid is here http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110622/ap_on_fe_st/us_fried_kool_aid

  7. WMCB says:

    Good news! According to the LA Times, Obama is going to stop relying on his much-touted “consensus” approach, and start governing from his gut.

    This spin from a helpful newspaper is such a transparent piece of pre-election positioning as to be laughable. IOW, Obama is going to throw his entire administration under the bus, and claim that his abysmal record is all because he listened to other people instead of doing the things that he really, honestly, in his virgin pure heart of hearts wanted to do. Who came up with this gameplan – Plouffe or Axelrod? Of course, the Netroots will cling to it like a liferaft: “SEE!! I told you he really really loves us, he’s just too fair to those nasty advisors of his..”

    Ed Morrissey at HotAir nails it:

    Put that aside for the moment. The subtext to this meme is that Obama’s team is apparently not creating much consensus any longer, or that the President is outside of whatever consensus develops. This might explain the slow march of Obama’s economic advisers out of the administration, as Obama insists on continuing the economic policies that have led to stagflation. The story might be that Obama is getting increasingly isolated from his team on policy decisions, which is a little easier to believe than turning up one’s nose to coordination and support.

    If this spin is intended to get Obama off the hook for bad policy decisions in the first two years, it might work — once. He can claim to have worried too much about consensus and having taken ill-advised half measures or even entirely bad decisions to gain it, and some might give Obama the benefit of the doubt for a short period of time, even though Obama assembled the team that provided that advice.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/27/great-news-president-to-start-operating-on-gut-instinct/#comments

    • votermom says:

      He’s going to run out of people to throw under the bus soon…

    • Valissa says:

      This last paragraph is priceless LOL…

      Addendum: Another thought occurred to me. Wasn’t the sales pitch on Obama that he would take an intellectual rather than instinctual approach to policy? This seems to suggest that even the White House realizes that they can’t sell Obama as a Mensa candidate in 2012.

      Waht will Axel-rove do now? He is supposedly an advertising/propaganda genius, but it’s well known that if a ‘brand’ doesn’t live up to it’s promises, it fails as a brand. Rebranding is tricky business. Propaganda may be powerful but it can only fool people for so long before they figure out they’re being made fools of..

    • ralphb says:

      Unless you’re a crackhead, like David Carr of the NYT, this won’t work with anyone who isn’t already a committed supporter. mucho Lame!

    • djmm says:

      You can’t pass the buck when you are the President. This is pitiful.

      djmm

    • myiq2xu says:

      Addendum: Another thought occurred to me. Wasn’t the sales pitch on Obama that he would take an intellectual rather than instinctual approach to policy? This seems to suggest that even the White House realizes that they can’t sell Obama as a Mensa candidate in 2012.

  8. ralphb says:

    I think Sarah understands that one of the chief political goals out here in the heartland is simply to be left alone. In order to achieve it, however, we must find ways of restricting the intellectual left’s and right’s political power and influence to something like the 15% of society they actually represent.

    • WMCB says:

      Oh, yeah – both sides want excessive power. They just go about it in different ways. And I’m sick of being called a raging Libertarian who wants zero govt (I don’t) any time I mention that.

      There are things I WANT govt to do. Absolutely. But I do not for a minute buy that all this expansion and money and agency on top of agency and regulation on top of regulation is in ANY way making govt MORE EFFECTIVE at doing the things that I fully concur it needs to do.

      The idea that govt can’t do anything for us unless we throw up our hands, hand them carte blanche, and allow them to consume 30 or 40 or 50% of the national economy is UNADULTERATED BULLSHIT. And I’ll keep calling them on that lie. The choice is not “More govt, more broad power, more money, or we’re all on our own in a libertarian hell.”

      BULL. SHIT. It’s a fake choice. Don’t buy it.

      • Valissa says:

        Honk! Honk!

        • WMCB says:

          Valissa, I screamed bloody murder when I was told the lie that we had to hand the govt massive power to be safe from terrorists. And I also scream bloody murder when told we have to hand the govt massive power to have a social safety net, or healthcare, or clean air, or other things.

          It’s the SAME FUCKING SCAM. It’s no different. Those things can be done at a reasonable cost without intruding on and controlling every aspect of our lives. IF they wanted to. IF their aim wasn’t just raw power and expanding the political and govt class.

        • votermom says:

          Those things can be done at a reasonable cost without intruding on and controlling every aspect of our lives. IF they wanted to. IF their aim wasn’t just raw power and expanding the political and govt class.

          Honk! Not to mention that their aim of graft – stealing us blind.

        • Valissa says:

          A scary and sad example of why it will be very hard to make the gov’t more efficient, effective and SMALLER.

          Expert: Corruption breeds battle of ethics, economics http://www.timesleader.com/golackawanna/news/Expert__Corruption_breeds_battle_of_ethics__economics_06-26-2011.html

          Robert Schmidt, Ph.D., 28, of West Scranton, received his doctorate degree in sociology from SUNY Binghamton in 2010. He is currently working to transform his dissertation titled “Revitalization and its Discontents: The Political and Symbolic Economy of Post-Anthracite Scranton” into a book.

          “My basic argument is that rather than attracting industry, politics has sort of become our venue of attracting economic development through public subsidies,” Schmidt said Friday. Politics, he contends, is an essential component of the economy of Northeastern Pennsylvania and has been so for so many years. It has now come to the point that the culture exists independent of the area and its residents.

          “Public employment is the most coveted form of livelihood around here because it’s the most secure. I would much rather work as a public employee in a secure, unionized job than I would in private employment where it’s insecure and you don’t know if the job is going overseas,” he said. “Because our economy is geared towards using politics as a venue, people aren’t in a position to overthrow this system of graft and corruption. People don’t want to overthrow it. They want a greater portion of it.”

        • ralphb says:

          I read this morning in the WSJ that public pension costs are now taking 50% of the cities total revenues in Providence, RI. It’s getting bad all over the country.

          We will simply not be able to pay all our obligations I’m afraid. There are going to be losers somewhere.

Comments are closed.