Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Greta Van Susteren, Sally Quinn, Sarah Palin | 07/10/2009 11:45 am

Greta Van Susteren Takes on Letterman, Sally Quinn for Palin-Bashing (Video)

It’s one thing to bash the woman, but quite another to bash her children, Van Susteren says; Levi Johnston pipes up about Palin’s resignation.
By The Staff at wowOwow.com
Fox

Greta Van Susteren is mad as hell and she’s not gonna take it anymore.

On her FOX News Channel show, "On the Record," last night, Van Susteren took The Washington Post’s "Sally Quinn" and others to task for shamelessly bashing not only Sarah Palin, but Palin’s children, as well. Meanwhile, Bristol Palin’s baby’s daddy, Levi Johnston, has his own theory about why Sarah Palin announced her resignation from the Alaska governorship: money. More on that later.

Van Susteren said last night:

"Why is Washington Post columnist Sally Quinn gratuitously trashing Gov. Palin? Quinn even accuses Palin of exploiting her children, specifically Bristol and little Trig, little Trig, who has Down’s syndrome. And David Letterman — he also can’t stay away from the governor, either."

Letterman made another sexually tainted joke about Palin this week, saying: "Is it just me or is anyone having naughty thoughts about Sarah Palin and those waders," referring to the fishing outfit she wore when talking to reporters this week while defending her resignation.

In an interview on MSNBC Thursday, Quinn, founder of the Post’s "On Faith" blog, said:

Well, clearly, she has not put her family first … And these children have, it seems publicly, to have been exploited by her in a, I think, really unfortunate way … She brings them all to the convention, including Trig, the baby. She brings the pregnant daughter with the boyfriend who clearly didn’t want to be there. She then travels around with the children, using them as sort of photo ops … she brings the children up when she needs them to shore up her own image.

Think what you want about the Alaska governor, but it’s likely many women think these kinds of slams are just inappropriate.

"This is wrong because, first of all, they are attacking her parenting skills. And why we are debating whether or not she should have had her kids up as late as she did on the night of the nominating convention is just borderline bizarre, particularly because we don’t ask that question of any of the guys who bring their children to big political events," former Massachusetts Gov. Jane Swift, a Republican who also had young children in office, said on "On the Record." "But even importantly, don’t we have more important things to be discussing in this country? And activities, we could move on to things that actually impact the millions of families who don’t have a job or don’t have paid maternity leave, things that are legitimate public policy issues."

Meanwhile, Levi Johnston, Bristol’s former fiancée, told reporters Thursday that he once heard Palin talking about how she could have a better life in which she could spend more time at home with less stress, and could accept high-paying offers coming her way. After all — she is the Republican everybody’s talking about at the moment. Johnston said that in December Palin "had talked about how nice it would be to take some of this money people have been offering us and just run with it, and saying forget everything else." Palin spokeswoman Meghan Stapleton had a quick comeback for that, saying: "It is interesting to learn Levi is working on a piece of fiction while honing his acting skills."

It’s no secret the Palins and Johnston have become, well, more distant in recent months as Johnston has taken to the press to criticize Alaska’s first family, and to talk about how much visitation his family should have with his son, born to Bristol, December 28.

Watch Van Susteren and Swift below:

378 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Lotus Kann

Now see if she came out and used that as her talking point, it would have made more sense.  I agree with you, most of those legislatures in Alaska probably did get jealous of her notoriety when she got the national spot light. I’m certain they were not the only one.  I loved seeing those other Republican men Governors all standing behind her at the Rep Gov convention a couple of months back, and you can see how irked they were that the media was not there for them but for her.  I love how Perry from my great state of Texas, thought that he wasn’t getting enough attention and litery got up to the podium and using his two hands around Sarah, moved her from front center and off to the side , and he then decided to take all the questions.  But dude,they weren’t there to listen to him.  But back to the Alaskan legislatures, I think it got too tough for her to get anything done.  They were jealous of her, they didn’t understand how she got the national spot light.  But if she came out and admitted this was the reason, I think I would have had more respect for her.   Maybe it wasn’t her intention to use the legal and ethics charges as her reason but since she was flying by the seat of her pants, she got caught in her own inability to form a complete sentence.  I’m not saying that I do myself, I know I am the worse at it, but I’m not a public official and not running for office. 

By Lotus Kann on 07/10/2009 3:15 pm
Rachel F

I understand your point, Lotus, but also keep in mind that she probably didn’t want to keep any bad feelings going by pointing fingers ("these people wouldn’t let me get my work done!") at people who the new governor would have to work with; she did briefly note that she wasn’t able to be useful to the state anymore (thus she didn’t want to be a "lame duck" governor), but she did it without pointing fingers. You might be right that she should have made more of a point of that, but I’m sure others would criticize her for that course of action too.

I think she felt less compunction in pointing at the ethics charges because they were doubtless a consideration in her resignation, and also because she didn’t have to worry about further alienating the people who were bringing the charges; their beef is with her, not the new governor, and they’re already as "alienated" as they can get, anyhow.

By Rachel F on 07/10/2009 3:40 pm
Maggie W
You should read the Alaskan newspapers more often.  One ethic case is still pending and she didn’t just have Dem problems in Alaska.  She had Repub problems, too.   The state will be much better off without her.  That’s for certain.  If you read Alaskan blogs, many want her to move to the lower 48.  (Dear God… please, no!)
By Maggie W on 07/10/2009 12:31 pm
Rachel F
A handful of boisterous democrats doesn’t constitute "many"; it seems that most people are more anxious to have their voices heard if they are dissatisfied than satisfied…so the absence of tons of happy Alaskan bloggers doesn’t indicate much…because happy Alaskans are less likely to sit down and "vent" about how pleased they are with the job their governor is doing than unhappy ones — and every politician has people who find fault. Furthermore, it has been my experience (and you can disagree or agree as you see fit, but it’s been what I’ve seen) that democrats are far more likely to take to the internet to support their favorites and trash the "others" than Republicans; as evidence, I present this site. ;)
By Rachel F on 07/10/2009 1:24 pm
Maggie W

" so the absence of tons of happy Alaskan bloggers doesn’t indicate much.."

Tons? Source?

By Maggie W on 07/10/2009 1:32 pm
Rachel F
Maggie, I’m saying that the fact that there are not tons of happy bloggers doesn’t mean much…not that there are tons of happy bloggers.
By Rachel F on 07/10/2009 1:42 pm
Deborah Kramer

Rachel, Thank you for being so kind to get your point or view across.  It is really a shame that some do not have any dignity to do the same.  You even state that you can agree or disagree and then you have to listen to the garbage that follows.  I believe that the Dems on this site will say or use anything until they believe that EVERYONE HATES Sarah Palin.  It is just so sad and immature.  They obviously will wait forever, thank you for speaking what I personally believe also.

By Deborah Kramer on 07/13/2009 1:10 pm
Rachel F
Thanks, Deborah…sometimes it seems like civility and decent behavior has gone out the window…it’s very refreshing to meet people who don’t believe in one set of behaviors for people you like, and another for people you don’t!
By Rachel F on 07/13/2009 1:41 pm
deber B
Nothing sleazy about it, F P.   It’s called making a business decision.   She will be leaving the citizens of Alaska in very capable hands and she knows that.
By deber B on 07/10/2009 11:52 am
Victoria J
Yes deber B….but its those who don’t do the same thing, that we want in public office.
By Victoria J on 07/11/2009 12:45 pm
F P
I believe her former salary was $125K per year. And that’s a pretty good figure to live no matter the 5 kids—many have that many children and live on a hell of a lot less.  She won’t make billions—a few million maybe.  And she surely didn’t do right by her constituents. 
By F P on 07/10/2009 11:45 am
deber B
Thanks, FP.   I realized that after I submitted it but went on to something else.   $125,000 is, indeed, correct.   Well, I agree she may not make billions….millions more likely.   I believe she did what was in the best interest of her constituents.  You know, she isn’t a bad person.   She has been a public servant as a mayor and a governor for 2 l/2 years.  Personally, I admire those who want to serve. 
By deber B on 07/10/2009 11:59 am
caj p
You admire those who want to serve!   How about she finish out her term for the people she supposedly cares so much about?   Sarah has bigger fish to fry and the Alaskan people can go and take a hike as far as she is concerned.  Sarah did what was best for Sarah and nothing to do with her constituents!
By caj p on 07/10/2009 12:04 pm
deber B

She has legal fees of over $500,000.   She resigned because she had to.   She left the citizens of Alaska in very capable hands as the Lt. Governor will step in.  

You should be happy, caj p!!   She’s out of there!   Why shouldn’t she do what is in the best interests of her family?   Your a mother.  As a mother myself, I would absolutely do what was best for my family.   If it meant resigning….out I’d go.

By deber B on 07/10/2009 12:21 pm
caj p
Sarah left because she has bigger ambitions nothing to do with her family!   Do you honestly think she is just going to stay home and become a devoted Mother?   Why her concern for her family now after dragging them all over the country and exposing them to such media coverage which she enjoyed when it suited her I may add?   She was so in love with Alaska and the work she was doing now all of a sudden it’s become too much….PLEASE!!!   I don’t buy one word of her explanation she has her eyes on the prize of running for President.   I wonder if she will care about her family when that comes around!!!
By caj p on 07/10/2009 1:01 pm