In fact one of its Lieutenants wrote a book titled: The Persecution of Sarah Palin: How the Elite Media Tried to Bring Down a Rising Star.
when the beast saw Sarah Palin appear out of thin air and captivate the American imagination, it tore her apart. The hate machine whirred and hummed and swung into high gear.
Lies became facts, the smarmiest allegations jumped to Page One, and anybody who had something horrible to say about Sarah Palin was handed a megaphone and told to speak as loudly as possible. Wherever the Palin-haters gathered, they flaunted their contempt. Anything that complicated their prearranged story was shunted aside. Bias, inaccuracy, and self-obsession ruled the day. The pack became frenzied. Rabid. They did not miss a single opportunity to slight Palin. They could not leave her alone—even after the election was over and their preferred candidate had won; even after Palin resigned her office in July 2009.
This is a book about how the feral beast hunted down its prey.
And how she fought back.But that was then. But things change. Today the Weekly Standard has become one of the "Feral beasts" unfairly smearing Sarah's character:
Whatever one makes of either one of them, the similarities between Sarah Palin and Carly Fiorina (who’s just announced she’s running for president) stop more or less at the chromosomal level. Fiorina is an accomplished (if controversial) businesswoman; Palin, a half-term governor and television star. Fiorina is a graduate of Stanford (with a degree in philosophy and medieval history) and MIT (with a master’s in management); Palin received a degree in, alas, journalism. Fiorina is an unusually articulate for a candidate for public office; Palin is . . . well, Sarah Palin.SHAME. Enough is enough. The Weekly Standard owes Sarah an apology.