Really? Do you have a link to the article where Politico says, "we hate Sarah Palin" or words to that effect? They aren't just refraining from saying it's not her baby, they're extremely contemptuous of the allegation it's not her baby, which is hardly evidence they're out to get her however they can.

As to the larger issue, she indulges in provocative and outlandish rhetoric to maintain her visibility (most recent discussions of her revolve around her uncharacteristic silence and whether Trump is stealing her thunder with similar statements equally typical of him) because any time she has to discuss actual policy she gets shredded by her inexperience. When someone makes a name for themselves solely by self promotion of ridiculous statements, objecting to covering their absurdities AS absurdities is hypocritical. If you're saying she shouldn't be covered at all I quite agree, but she won't get much substantive coverage until/unless she offers substance TO cover. That's (most of) what was so reprehensible about a cover photo of her in running shorts for a story on her VP nomination: The nomination was a substantive story, as was, to a lesser degree, the fitness article for which the picture was taken, and that kind of superficial trivializing treatment was indefensible. That's the exception rather than the rule, however; Palin makes many absurd public statements, and reporting them as absurd is no more vindictive than doing the same with Al Sharptons similar ones. It's actually NOT a caricature: That's the problem, but it's in the candidates, not the coverage.

I called her a MEDIA whore, not a sex worker. I can't help being reminded of the time a wotmania uber-liberal jumped on me for saying Hillary (like her hubby) prostituted herself to Dem insiders and fat cats; that kind of terminology wouldn't be out of bounds if a man did it, but is when a woman does? Since when are whoring (media or otherwise) or prostitution (political or otherwise) exclusively female behavior? Let s/he who is without sexism burn the first bra. Fact is, the person who tweets about Sarah Palin the most is Sarah Palin, so if she doesn't want people digging through her dirty laundry maybe she shouldn't air it so prominently. Whether she's a woman is neither here nor there to that. Likewise I've seen no reason to think the lunacy about her pregnancy is misogynistic just because it happens to involve something only women can do. Does the fact only men have semen mean anyone angry at Clinton for lying to the public about Lewinsky is just a man-hater?

I should ignore liberally biased sources so I can see how objective sources have a liberal bias? ' /> Your admonition against being a sheep would be more convincing if it weren't contained within the party line of which it's a part. The medias only real agenda is getting ratings so they can sell more ad time (bringing to mind Jon Stewarts comment that it's less about left/right than corrupt/uncorrupt). Palin knows that as well as anyone, and relies on it.