Monday, December 20, 2010

Sarah Palin, FYI Reacting Precludes Responding

Mrs. Todd Palin, Hawaii December 2009, without makeup or hairstyling or wardrobe
For a long time quite a while ago I studied what is called the 4th Way.  Brought to the west by G.I. Gurdjieff, and transmitted by J.G. Bennett to the group who formed The Claymont Society, the teachings were designed to assist us in transforming ourselves. We learned that man could be said to have three centers: thinking (consciousness), feeling and moving (body).  These three centers each have their own brain, if you will—thus my domain name.  We also learned that we act, by and large, automatically.  We are asleep almost all of the time, even though we would say we are awake. To become what we can—and need to—become, we need to truly wake up.


Our moving brain is what allows us to drive a car and not have to pause to think before slamming on the brakes when the car in front of us suddenly stops.  We also do not have to remember to breathe, or to keep our hearts beating.  Learning how to type is great once it is automatic. Usually, this is all good, except when our feelings take over our bodies.

If we do not learn how to exert some sort of control over our feelings, our emotions run rampant. In a pique of anger or distress we can summon up enormous power that can equally help or destroy.  Where does the superhuman strength come from that allows us to lift heavy objects off a trapped loved one?  At the same time, from where does the ability or even planning to strike out at a perceived foe come?  Only when we can separate ourselves from our feelings do we have the possibility of choosing our next actions.

In our normal states our thinking brain simply serves as a storage system. We replay over and over the memories that tie in to our emotions, and more often than not, these are negative ones. Yet when we find ways to still our minds—perhaps through meditation—we can watch what the sensitive screen displays without letting any one event get caught in the instant replay. The ability to separate ourselves from this screen opens us up to new ideas, new possibilities and creative thought while giving us the possibility of true consciousness, even if briefly.


Mrs. Palin likes to proffer platitudes, but doesn't see that her own actions belie her words. This tweet by the bitter twitter is vitally important because it demonstrates that she has no idea that there is a world where people don't react, but instead, respond. She slams her famous guest, Kate, for failing to 'man up' and be a mighty meat-eating, rain- and cold-surviving matron like her.

Reacting is part and parcel of being asleep and acting automatically. We see, over and over again, how she simply reacts to things: perceived slights in particular. Life holds so much more! One needn't simply suffer from reacting which usually produces the opposite effect that one was after. If one takes the time to become aware of one's emotions, and thus rises above one's automatic thoughts and actions, one has a far better chance to guide the body (speech, gesture, dress, behavior) in a measured and positive response.

Life provides circumstances, and then we truly do have a choice of simply reacting to them (most often negatively) or taking the time to formulate a response.  I won't hold my breath waiting for Mrs. Palin to begin a study of anything, much less the 4th way. The good part is many people sense, inside themselves, that she misses the mark on even her most 'heartfelt' snipes.

[For a simple exercise of how much control we have over our bodies... try this:  hold both hands out in front of you.  Rotate your hands/arms in a clockwise direction, both of them.  Now, hold both arms so your fingertips are facing each other.  Again, try to rotate both hands in a clockwise direction... :)]

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Free Bradley Manning

The US Army private who is charged with somehow obtaining hundreds of thousands of classified documents and videos has apparently been held in solitary confinement for seven months... far longer than most of the documents have even been released.

If he is indeed guilty, I do not know his motives. (How does an Army private gain access to so much classified information anyway???)  What I do know is that someone exposed a rather ugly underbelly of our nation's international relations and our illegal wars, and therefore embarrassed some high-level politicos.  It's this kind of situation that I thought Barack Obama would rectify by assuring us that his policy of transparency is fulfilled.  Instead, I hear no word from our President while this Army fellow languishes in prison as if he were already a convicted criminal.

Tonight my heart and mind goes out to Manning, and my prayers, such as they are, intone a plea for a more humane treatment of this person who may have helped to make public things that we the people should have been made aware of already.  Solitary confinement is not deserved.  Scorn should be reserved for those who would fashion a story to tell us that is not reality.  Thanks should go to anyone who risks their own personal freedom to bring the truth to us all.

Yes, there are probably times where secrecy by our state is warranted.  From what I've read and heard about the Wikileaks document dump, this is not one of those times.  The only people who have been harmed are the alleged leaker himself, and certain heads of states.  Embarrassment does not equal real harm.

Free Bradley Manning, or at least treat him like an American soldier, a human being, who has yet to be convicted of any crime.

Saturday, December 04, 2010

Time to Pull the Plug on Palin

It should be clear by now that neither Republicans nor Democrats want anything more to do with Mrs. Palin.

The not-so-liberal media has avoided dealing with her most egregious failings, although of late, no less than the Kennedys, the Bushs, Karl Rove, and other right-wing luminaries have tried to spread the message:  Mrs. Palin, you don't have what it takes to run for President, much less any national political office and probably even state office.

Her reality show is struggling to get back up to its initial ratings.  Her latest book is struggling to gain wide acceptance.  Her daughter lost her bid to win DWTS, and her PAC is paying more money to her and her foreign "consultants" by far than it is to Republican or TeaParty hopefuls. Sixty-three thousand dollars (wow, that sounds like a lot to me) went to purchasing her own book so it could be machine-signed and given out as a free bonus.

Yet, the media clamors to know if Mrs. Palin is going to "run" for the highest office in the land. Every tweet or Facebook posting draws commentary as if it were something important.  It is time, no -- past time -- for our 4th estate to do their job and begin to vet this would-be candidate.

May I recommend Palingates.  Mrs. Palin's abysmal history, from when she was mayor of a village of 5000 to when she was appointed as Oil and Gas Commissioner (a job she quit) to when she was Governor (another job she quit) besieged by ethics complaints (BECAUSE SHE ACTED UNETHICALLY!), is out there for all to see.  Yet so few seem to focus on these essential flaws.  Media, start doing your job. The material is all out there, easy to find thanks to the tireless efforts of bloggers, yes bloggers, some of whom are not even American.

A Palin presidency would affect the entire world, and the world is watching ... and wondering when in hell the American media will begin to do its prescribed duty.  Vet Mrs. Palin, please, NOW.  Take note of her ties to a secessionist organization.  Take note of her fake pregnancy (pdf).  Take note of her connections to dominionism and the Seven Mountain proponents. Take note of her abysmal record of raising her own children - one an unwed mother who is likely pregnant again, another a school bus vandal, another yet a house vandal.  Take note of her legacy as half-term governor, where elders were abused, where indigenous people were abandoned, where the environment was sacrificed in the name of profits, where ethics and transparency were simply feel-good words and not guiding principles.

A majority of the media along with a sliver of America made Mrs. Palin what she is today.  I hold out no hope that her minions will wake up anytime soon, but if the media doesn't hold to its basic tenets (to report the story, not to suck up to someone for access) we will be subject to month after depressing month of shoring up someone who would give Goebbels a run for his money in another era.

Stop pretending this narcissist has anything at all to recommend her as a candidate for US president.  It's time, Time.  It's time, WashPost.  It's time, HuffPo.  It's time, NYTimes.  It's well past time actually. Pull the plug.  The country will breathe a collective sigh of relief, and we all will have a fighting chance again to stop corporations from merging with government to give us our new fascist state.

Saturday, November 20, 2010

Reviewing Mrs. Palin's Qualifications for Office

It may indeed be nobler to stop exposing Mrs. (quitter) Todd Palin for the fraud she is, and stop exposing her cult-like followers for the fools they seem to be, and this thought nags at me frequently. But the laws of physics, insofar as they apply to the media-physical world, require that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Would that Mrs. Palin herself, for a time at least, cease and desist. Yet she persists, be it via Twitter, Facebook, Fox, or whatever other unassailable outlet behind which she can hide (think TLC or Harper Collins).

There would then be no need to provide a counter to her inanity, or the slavish ramblings of her bots, either, and I could go on cleaning house and planning Thanksgiving dinner for my family with only thoughts in my head of turkey and whether I have enough matching silverware for the table.


I took a rare cruise over to the C4P site and discovered a post that attempts to answer the question, "Is Sarah Palin Qualified to Be President?" They declare,
The opinion leaders sincerely want to know whether Governor Sarah Palin is "qualified" to run for president. Why else would they keep asking the question, right? So ... let's examine a few of Palin's populist credentials that stack up surprisingly well against the more conventional resumes of five recent presidents. In the second part of this series, we'll explore five additional qualifications Palin brings beyond her elected offices, appointments and volunteer work -- the real-life experience that could be pivotal in a presidential run and successful presidency. Stay tuned.
(New York Magazine has a great story on this burning question, in which they detail the three ways that fellow Republicans evade the question.  Number 1 - Avoid answering it altogether. Number 2 - Compare her experience with President Obama's. Number 3 - Answer in only the technical sense: age 35, US citizen, sure.)

The C4P post lists the top five reasons she is qualified.  Here they are, in order:
  1. Ten Years in Municipal Government
  2. Ten Years volunteer work in the Parent-Teacher-Association
  3. Two years pro-life advocacy
  4. One year as an oil and gas commissioner
  5. Two and a half years governing the largest state in America
Don't all laugh at once, please. We should take a look at each of these in turn, and in so doing, revisit information we all know already but probably bears repeating.

Ten Years in Municipal Government

This refers to 4 years as a city council member and 6 years as a Mayor. Let's keep in mind that the population of Wasilla at the time was a little more than 5,000.

Time's headline read, Mayor Palin: A Rough Record.
Palin was a highly polarizing political figure who brought partisan politics and hot-button social issues like abortion and gun control into a mayoral race that had traditionally been contested like a friendly intramural contest among neighbors.
(...)
Palin limited her duties further by hiring a deputy administrator to handle much of the town's day-to-day management. Her top achievement as mayor was the construction of an ice rink, a project that landed in the courts and cost the city more than expected.
The Washington Post's headline was, As Mayor of Wasilla, Palin Cut Own Duties, Left Trail of Bad Blood.

Politico remarked,
Palin, who portrays herself as a fiscal conservative, racked up nearly $20 million in long-term debt as mayor of the tiny town of Wasilla — that amounts to $3,000 per resident.
And the Washington Independent informed us about Mrs. Palin's delight at having scored Federal earmarks for the tiny town:
Wasilla City Council Informational Memorandum 99-62, prepared on June 14, 1999... outlines some of the state-funded projects that Wasilla City secured that year, including $1.2 million for storm water treatment and $605,000 for pedestrian pathways.

Then, slapped in the margin, former Mayor Sarah Palin — reformer extraordinaire — scribbled the following message: "FYI This does not include our nearly one million Dollars from the Feds for our Airport Paving Project."
In summary, Mrs. Palin made enemies, left the little city in significant debt, and actually enlisted a lobbyist to secure earmarks from the "Feds."  The picture we have is of a polarizing figure who was fiscally irresponsible, and who had to hire a city administrator to do her job, too!  Not exactly a glowing resume item.  But let's move on to the next.

Ten years volunteer work in the Parent-Teacher-Association

I am not sure where the C4P author comes up with this item or why it counts for anything, although he/she does reference the oft-proved-false "Going Rogue" as a part source. Mrs. Palin's PTA claims were checked out by Politifact at length.  They published this:
After tracking down paper records going back more than a decade, he said, they were able to confirm that Palin was a member of the Iditarod PTA for two years, during the time she served as the mayor of Wasilla.
How being a member of the PTA for any length of time is a qualification for US President still boggles my mind. Hundreds of thousands of women and men could put this on their resume, but they normally don't even if they were an officer or a pro at fundraising or event-organizing, none of which seems to be the case with Mrs. Palin.

Two years of pro-life advocacy

Yes, Mrs. Palin is unapologetically anti-choice, and bases her belief in Christian dogma - the supreme wisdom of her God who only bestows pregnancy on those who can handle it. Rape or incest? No worry. Women should not be allowed to make a choice in these situations because God knows best. Advocating a religious belief has never, in my life anyway, served to qualify someone for political office. What if a Muslim candidate listed, as a qualification, that they'd advocated for prayer rugs in the workplace for two years?  Would that boost their appeal? Or perhaps, a Mormon who advocated for polygamy? Or what about advocating for refusing blood transfusions, as Jehovah's Witnesses believe?

One year as an oil and gas commissioner

In truth, Mrs. Palin served for less than a year and quit this job in protest when the Alaska Department of Law ruled that she could not engage in any discussion about whether or not then (and now) AK Republican Party Chairman Randy Ruedrich was under investigation for ethic violations. According to Alaska Daily News at the time, Mrs. Palin said,
the experience was taking the "oomph" out of her passion for government service and she decided to quit rather than becoming bitter.
Many have speculated that the job was too taxing because she didn't want to learn what was needed to do it, she didn't like commuting to the job, and that she used this incident as a way to bow out. Use the Google to verify.

Two and a half years governing the largest state in America

This item is so funny on its face.  First of all, Alaska may have the largest land mass of any state but it is 48th out of 50 states in population, with North Dakota and tiny Vermont filling in the last two slots, so touting Alaska as the "largest state in America" is a clear resume-padding statement. Alaska has a population roughly equivalent to Memphis or Boston. Its population suffers from a myriad of problems including domestic abuse, rape, alcoholism, and other substance abuse. Use the Google, there are too many reports to link.

The other aspect that is so funny is Mrs. Palin is only one of three governors in the history of the US who quit, mid-term.  The other two were Eliot Spitzer (sex scandal) and Jim McGreevy (came out of the closet). Her final words were a quote from General MacArthur,
"We are not retreating. We are advancing in another direction."
I strongly recommend viewing (if you have not before and if you have the stomach for it) her speech on YouTube.  HuffingtonPost has the video and the transcription here.

Conclusion

If these are the top five reasons to support a Mrs. Palin run for the Presidency, all I can say is, "Good damn luck." Republicans (and major media outlets) are already back-pedaling on support and continue to do so. Democrats already know what a no-nothing piece of scolding fluff she is.  Independents are watching and waiting and probably laughing. Maybe the second part of C4P's Palin resume will have something worth bragging about.

I'm not holding my breath, and meantime I wish you all a fine Thanksgiving. May all beings be well and happy, friends.

Monday, November 01, 2010

Final Thoughts Election 2010

The Rally4Sanity was apolitical, darnit!  But also, BRAVA!!! I did not make it there, mostly because due to the fact that I honestly can't walk more than a few blocks without having one knee succumb to arthritis.  But by all that could be holy, what a fantastic gathering of you, me, and everyone who realistically is our neighbor!  I know what Keith Olbermann took issue with Jon's seemingly even-handed disparagement of cable reporting/opinion in general.  What dear Keith doesn't take into account is that he (and even my beloved Rachel Maddow) only exist thanks to the channel who deserves the "Extreme Distortion Award," Faux Nooz.

All I can think of tonight is how horrid it will be for my good friends in Nevada if Sharon Angle manages to pull off a win.  Some of them say that Harry Reid is corrupt.  You know, I think he had pressure, but not in the way some said.  For example, the previous administration grossly lied and acted on those lies, and has as of yet, to be called on those lies in a public forum.  I am only mad at Harry Reid for failing to instigate investigations and grand juries into the constitutional slaps-in-the-face that former (doofus) President Bush and his administration perpetrated.  The list is too long to note.

I've called or SMS'd all my relatives and friends about voting.  Even though I tried my best to stick a fork in their sides about voting, I still have my own doubts.  I KNOW that the 2000 election was subject to election fraud (NOT voter fraud, election fraud - those are different). So as I vote now, and prod my loved ones into the same, I have no particular confidence that the person(s) I vote for will actually have my action recorded for them.  That's abysmal. But it is what it is.  If you don't believe me, just try -- just try asking your local poll worker what exactly happens with your choices!  And then try to see if they can provide you with an uninterrupted chain of command for your vote. Anything you can verify.

Meantime, happy November 2, all.

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Random Thoughts on the Eve of 2010 Elections

What is with Joe Miller's whiskers?  He's never clean shaven but that shadow never grows into a beard.

Why is it that only Teapublican people are caught being violent toward those who hold opposing political views?

If Nevada really dumps Reid for Angle, I will have to excommunicate NV from my "great states to visit" list.

Does anyone really and truly think that restoring Republican dominance in Congress will help the middle class?  Or put a damper on corporate greed and fraud?

Sarah Palin has spawned a slew of new grifters who seem to think they can improve their personal financial situation by running for office, even if they don't win: for example, O'Donnell and Miller.

Why are so many Teapublicans afraid of speaking with the press?  And don't give me that line that the media is controlled by liberals.  It sounds like they just don't want people to learn what they really want to do to our country, otherwise, why not broadcast it at every opportunity?  Same goes for Democrats, by the way.

Does anyone care that our social programs save lives, restore families, and help keep America together?

When did this extreme us vs them begin, with the "great uniter," GWBush?  That's what I think and it's only accelerated from there.

Who gave the Xtians the right to try to impose their "religious" (and yes, I quoted that word on purpose) beliefs on everyone in the country!?  You believe it, you practice it. But in the name of freedom FROM religion, don't try to legislate your beliefs and force everyone to comply.

The most brilliant move made by progressives in the last 5 years is the founding of Republicorp!  No wonder Rand Paul's mob felt like they had to stomp it.

Rachel's show in Alaska was outstanding.  Rachel is outstanding.

Jon Stewart is one in a million.

I'll still vote for Manchin, but it will be in spite of his pro-gun anti-healthcare stance.  Shame on you, Manchin.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

The Pregnancy That Never Was

Before September slips away totally, I thought I'd post about a difficult topic:  proving a negative. When you find signs or evidence that someone actually DID something, you prove the positive.  The culprit can be convicted even with circumstantial evidence.  Proving a negative is much more tricky.  In this case, the negative statement is, "Sarah Palin did not give birth to the child who became her political prop during the 2008 election season."

Perhaps this is why so many in the other media have had such a hard time with the subject of Sarah's "wild ride" and its implications.  Here's what I mean.  They simply took for granted that she was the miracle mother who survived the 11-hour Dallas to Wasilla journey while leaking amniotic fluid to produce a 6lb 2oz, 5-week (at least) premature Down syndrome infant in a facility that was not even equipped to handle twins.  In order to challenge this story, one would have to prove the negative—that it never happened.

But what is missing from this story tale?  Are there not enough missing pieces to make the whole puzzle unsolvable?  Here's a partial list of what we have not seen as evidence to support this fantastic tale:
  • Official or family pictures showing Mrs. Palin's normal progression through pregnancy
    -The reason?  She didn't TELL anyone, even her family, of the pregnancy.
  • Hospital records of a live birth on the day specified (April 18, 2008)
    -Curiously, the local hospital suddenly stopped publishing birth announcements and went 'dark' in April 2008.
  • A birth certificate
    -Mrs. Palin has claimed she provided this evidence but nobody has seen it.
  • Medical records indicating routine pre-natal visits
    -Again, Mrs. Palin claimed she opened her medical records but nobody has seen them.
  • Travel documents and time sheets accounting for normal pre-natal visits
    -Scrutiny of Mrs. Palin's official calendar reveals no time off or travel for such visits.
  • Contemporaneous accounts by any patient or visitor who witnessed the birth mother arriving, remaining at, or leaving the hospital where birth occured
    -Apparently, nobody saw her at Mat-Su Regional Medical Center, or they chose never to talk about it.
  • Pictures of the birth mother in bed with child and/or being visited by family members in the hospital
    -We saw Mrs. Palin's parents with an infant identified as Trig in a single picture but not one of her with the baby, with her children, with her husband, or even with close friends and well-wishers in the hospital
  • Contemporaneous accounts by anyone in Texas during the Governor's conference who had contact with Mrs. Palin at the hotel or at the conference itself or anyone seeing her on travel between Alaska and Texas and back (that support her state of pregnancy)
    -We only have Mrs. Palin's recounting of Governor Perry mentioning her pregnancy, but there is no supporting evidence this happened, and the Alaska Airlines statement declines to confirm her "state of pregnancy"
  • Anecdotal evidence from anyone regarding the state of and progression of the pregnancy who may have witnessed her doctor's visits, trips to the store, interactions during the course of her government business or unofficial snapshots during public events
    -Instead of this sort of confirmation, we have legislators who were there, where Mrs. Palin was, on the job, saying she sure as heck did NOT look pregnant
  • Baby shower pictures for showers given before birth, as is the norm
    -The only baby shower we know of was some weeks after the supposed birth, and the baby in the pictures is clearly NOT the same baby that was shown being held by Mrs. Palin's parents in a news release
  • Evidence of any maternity outfits instead of the omnipresent long black jacket, black scoop-necked top, and black pants or skirt plus colored scarves
    -Surely a woman well-known for caring about clothing and appearance (she gets custom manicures for her toes!) would splurge and buy one or two stylish maternity outfits, but not Mrs. Palin...
  • Baby pictures and/or stories about Trig's early treatment for Down syndrome or prematurity
    -Apparently the birth was so easy and the DS disability so trivial that Mrs. Palin never thought to talk about or write about or schedule appointments about taking care of her new "blessing from God"
  • Correspondence from/to family members and friends or staff discussing any aspect of the pregnancy
    -Many of Mrs. Palin's e-mails requested through the FOIA were released but not one contained what would be normal information about her pregnancy except for a curious one, "How to answer questions about the pregnancy..."
There's a saying that the absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence.  But in this case, the overwhelming absence of any evidence that Mrs. Palin was indeed pregnant is most telling. Surely there would be some publicly accessible documents or images that would add weight to Mrs. Palin's assertion that she was indeed pregnant with and actually gave birth to the child called Trig.

The only evidence for the positive is Mrs. Palin's own story, told and re-told and embellished and told again, plus the appearance of the mysterious Gusty photos right after Mrs. Palin's selection as the VP nominee.  That's basically it.  Is the reason there is no other evidence to support her crazy tale because it simply does not exist?

Anyone with knowledge or information regarding facts that either support or refute Mrs. Palin's "pregnant with Trig" claims:  Please contact me (find my e-mail in my profile) or better yet, send information to the secure and anonymous hotline at Palingates.blogspot.com.

If Mrs. Palin was living the simple, rustic life she espouses, none of this would be an issue.  Instead, she flaunts her celebrity status and exerts an impact on national politics whether or not she seeks to run for office.  Once she retreats (or is exposed for the extreme fraud she has perpetrated on the American people), I will stop reloading.

Saturday, September 11, 2010

Nine Years On... Still No Answers


"The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies, but would be ashamed to tell big lies."

Friday, July 30, 2010

A Conspiracy By Any Other Name...

 With all due respect to two of my favorite Alaskan bloggers, and I say that sincerely, their discussion with Nicole Sandler made me grit my teeth.  I am speaking of AKM (Jeanne Devon), and Shannyn Moore. AKM is, of course, the brilliant writer behind The Mudflats, and Shannyn's got a widely-read blog, Moore Up North, and a topical daily radio show. I've corresponded with Jeanne by e-mail and called into Shannyn's show at least twice. I met them both in person, right after last year's Netroots Nation in Pittsburgh, PA. Their warmth and humor were delightful.  Their disappointment in and disagreements with the former half-term Alaska governor are well-known.

Shannyn (L) and AKM (R) at Pittsburgh Mudstock
Why teeth-gritting, though?  Here's why.  It's one thing to make a personal or political decision about whether or not to cover a particular story, and I'm talking about babygate—the pregnancy that Sarah Palin faked in order to boost her pro-life cred with evangelical Christians and parlay her thin resume into a shot to become the Vice President of these United States.  It's another to disparage, however off-handedly, those who do address, research and endeavor to cover that same story.  If you listen to the Nicole Sandler interview (in the first link of this post), you'll learn that Nicole was able to interview Jeanne and Shannyn just as the two intrepid Alaskans concluded their second Netroots Nation in Las Vegas. Nicole had recently interviewed Patrick, one of the chief authors of the Palin watchdog blog Palingates, twice: see here and here for the details. As a result of her education about the babygate topic, Nicole asked some followup questions of the Alaskan bloggers on her segment.  Their responses were, to my ear, condescending and disparaging.


When you use words like conspiracy theory and tin-foil hats in conjunction with describing why you are not writing or talking about a potential story, you trigger a response in listeners, to wit: "Watch your step here, this is la-la land!"  Both these accomplished ladies seemed to "pooh-pooh" any efforts to get to the bottom of the clearly impossible stories Mrs. Todd Palin has given concerning the birth of the child she calls her son, Trig.

Like I said, I can understand why someone would not want to touch a story that the "mainstream media" decided to let lay fallow.  One only has to read the recently released e-mails from the Journolist group to find some sort of justification for this.  Is the justification valid?  I don't happen to think so, but then, that's me, and I have a day job. My future life plans do not depend on whether or not I blog about the right topics, or the safe topics, or the approved topics.  Running for political office is not in my future.  Cozying up to Marcos Moulitsas or any other notable in the Democratic Party is not one of my goals.

Let's face it. though.  Labels have meaning to people.  Label something a conspiracy theory and red flags shoot up everywhere.  BEWARE, BEWARE!

So fine, don't touch the story, but don't label it in such a way that I, and many of my blogging and commenting friends are made out to be kooks.  It's obvious from some of the details that AKM and Shannyn provided during the interview with Nicole that they are not very well read on the subject of babygate.  There is now a mountain of detailed evidence that makes it clear why not one of us, those who did choose to follow this story, have been threatened with a lawsuit for claiming that Mrs. Todd Palin defrauded the country with her impossible Wild Ride tale and imagined magical birth of Trig.  It is because it is NOT TRUE.

For an excellent overview/summary, I implore you to view these newly released videos:






Videos are courtesy of lidia17 who published them at Palingates, and summarize the indisputable evidence that disproves the assertion that Mrs. Todd Palin was actually ever pregnant with the child she claims as her own son, Trig.

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Comment of the Day

This, one of 55 comments as of now, appears under a Politico story about GOP House members rejecting a plan to help 9/11 responders who still suffer from chronic illness as a result of their rescue and cleanup efforts:
Why should I werk for others to sit on their behinds pretending to be sick years after an event? Can they prove they were their? I think not. I cant wait for Nov so we can take back our contry from freeloaders and illigals. We need more real Amercans in charge not Socialists who want a free ride paid by my hard eared money.

Posted By: Sarah4Pres2012 | July 29, 2010 at 09:04 PM

It has to be a put-on, doesn't it? Either way, it's the best comment I've read all day.  :)

Sunday, July 11, 2010

Activision-Blizzard, Privacy and Me

If you've read the "about me" you will have learned that one of my interests is gaming.  In particular, for the last several years, I've devoted some of my anonymous time on the 'net to Blizzard's wildly popular World of Warcraft game.  This is an MMORPG -- massive multiplayer online role playing game, for those who don't know the acronym.

Gathering herbs in World of Warcraft, Burning Crusade
Activision merged with Blizzard some months ago. Since then, the powers that be at Activision-Blizzard have veered off onto a path they must think will increase their revenue.  It all started with Battle.net, an entity established to register players who participate in the MMO aspect of Blizzard's games.  If you wanted to test your skills against someone else on the other side of town or the continent or even the ocean, you could play Starcraft or Diablo (which are single player games too) by logging in to Battle.net and competing online.   World of Warcraft (WoW) players found, shortly after the Battle.net entity was upgraded, that in order to continue their adventures in the world of Azeroth (WoW's fantasy world), they too had to have a Battle.net ID.

Fine, but, the next step in the still-unrevealed plan was to institute something called Real ID in the WoW game.  What this new coding allowed: players could designate other people as real life friends and thus, see and communicate with all the characters their friends played on any Blizzard game, and be seen and contacted by them as well.  It went further -- friends of friends could also see the real name of anyone who made a neighbor or relative a Real ID friend.  A good friend that I know and trust in real life is one thing, but I do not know who he has friended!

Sentinel Hill at night
 The next step was announced a week ago.  Blizzard would, beginning with its release of a new 3-part Starcraft expansion require anyone who posted on the forums to reveal their real name attached to any forum post they made.  They intended to require this same privacy disclosure for anyone wanting to post on the official Blizzard WoW forums as of the release of the latest upcoming expansion named Cataclysm.  The excuse given was to force the forum trolls into the light… and what, shame them into not posting their garbage?

As a result of the announcement, several thousand players expressed their astonishment, dismay, and rejection of this idea in a huge thread -- nearly 2,500 pages and nearly 50,000 posts.  Most everyone said No - as did I. 

For background, I have respected Blizzard for a dozen years or more.  One reason is they have always made a Mac version of their games, and I refuse to buy a PC just so I can game.  Another reason is their products have been great!  Yet another reason is they have always been relatively responsive to their customer base.  I played the original Warcraft series, the Diablo series and the Starcraft series.  I own collector's editions of the original WoW game and the first two expansions.  I played in the original WoW beta back in 2004.  I have several characters at max level (currently 80), who are fully trained in their professions.  Want a jewelcrafter, blacksmith, alchemist, inscriber, tailor, enchanter, engineer, or leatherworker who can craft any item possible?  I've got one.  Most of my characters are also fully skilled in the lesser professions of cooking, fishing and first aid.

Giving up my legacy characters and the hundreds of hours I've put into their development would be a bitter pill to swallow.  Nevertheless, I cancelled my automatic account subscription as a result of intuiting where Activision-Blizzard was going with their new business plan.  They have deals with Facebook and even Microsoft.  You have to read the updated TOS, EULA, and the Battle.net Terms of Use darn near daily to catch these significant changes.  Players are now subject to in-game advertising.  It was one thing to see vanity pets representative of other Blizzard games.  But who wants to see the Windows 7 logo (with the blue background) temporarily floating in the sky over Azeroth?  Who wants to have to write on someone's Facebook wall to earn an achievement in game?  I'm not saying this will happen, but I can't believe it's too far off the mark.

Fourth of July Fireworks outside Ironforge
According to Bobby Kotick, mover behind Activision and killer of Infinity Ward, WoW players and Facebook facers can be of mutual benefit to each other.  In other words, he would like to parlay Blizzard's 11 million subscribers into Facebook page holders and along the way get Facebook holders buying and playing WoW, and targeting advertising to both groups along the way.  What he doesn't get is that never the twain shall meet.  Social networking is not what an MMORPG is about, and vice versa. 

I can't speak for everyone who plays WoW, but I will assert, with as much might as I can muster, that I do NOT play wow to network socially.  I play WoW to enjoy a pastime that my non-gamer family and non-gamer friends and non-gamer co-workers don't know about and cannot begin to appreciate.  My sister and my fellow employees don't want to know the names of my characters across all the games and even if they did, I don't care to share that information with them.  I don't necessarily want my closest friends to know that I've started a brand new character on a different server just so I can immerse myself in the role-playing aspect of the game without interruption.


Death Knights can be beautiful, and they can walk on water too
The good news is Blizzard's co-founder Mike Morhaime has stated that they will not "at this time" proceed with insisting that we use a real name when posting on the forums.  I released a huge sigh of relief as a result, but am wounded by the thought that such a notion was ever considered.  I do not intend to renew my subscription or pre-order any new packages until I see where this is going.  Was it because of the huge outcry from current subscribers?  Was it because Blizzard's own employees would be put at risk with their real names visible?  Was it California's or Canada's privacy laws?  Was it the ESRB's threat to remove the friendly rating?

I post on numerous forums, and I blog under a pseudonym.  Nowhere (aside from logging in to my employer's online time sheet) is my real name a requirement.

I am Ennealogic.  I am Ennealogic here, and on Palingates, The Mudflats, Immoral Minority,  Washington Post, Huffington Post, NY Times and even on the Wall Street Journal.  I am Ennealogic on Think Progress and Gawker and Daily Kos, and countless other sites.  What I say becomes part of my cred as Ennealogic.  I do not need to be known as my real name for the same cred to apply.  A rose by any other name… I am Ennealogic when it comes to my political thoughts and opinions.  You can Google Ennealogic and find out what I think.  I do not need to reveal my real name in order to express my thoughts and opinions about anything.

I am reminded of the time when Mike Doogan outed AKM from The Mudflats.  We had this discussion then, and his excuse was that AKM had no right to express her opinion and also remain anonymous.  I will never forgive that oaf for crudely and gratuitously attempting to damage a real person who provided a real service to so many readers.  AKM's words and stories have not grown better (or worse) now that we know the name that goes with the acronym.  AKM is now and always has been a reliable, responsible, creative, investigative, and indomitable voice ringing out across the country (and the world!).  She neither lost nor gained any credibility with the outing, but she certainly lost the protection of her anonymity.  She does not speak to the question of whether her business ventures were adversely affected or her family threatened.


Flying over Northrend is an incredible experience
Those who troll forums, regardless of their variety, will still troll because it is their wont -- no matter if they post under the name Jack Fisher or Usuckmydingle.  Those who moderate forums can just as easily ban one name or IP address as another.  Those who suffer the trolls can't do anything anyway, except if a real name is provided, then look up that real name and deliver real world consequences.  Is that what Activision-Blizzard intended?  Did they really want their decent, mature, thoughtful posters to gather up torches and pitchforks and clamor outside the apartment (or basement or hovel) of a troll?  And do what, exactly?

Anyway -- my recent absence from all things politics and Sarah Palin in particular is a result of time spent opposing this recent scheme brought to us by yet one more corporatist who thinks selling customer identities is the path to even more financial rewards. 

I have one thing to say in closing:  measure carefully any request/demand to surrender privacy.  Make sure that you can trust those who ask or require it, and make sure that such disclosure is indeed warranted and needed.  In the case of Activision-Blizzard, nobody needs to know that my character name belongs to my real name.  Nobody but those who bill my credit card.  And if they insist on linking that real information with my avatar and character names, I will surely turn my back on their games.  It will pain me immensely to do so, but I will not abide by such a violation of trust.  They promised me they would keep my personal information inviolate.  I expect no less.

Tuesday, July 06, 2010

Babygate in the Blogs

With a H/T to Palingates' commenter AKSandhills for bringing it to my attention, please make sure to look at both of these posts in turn:
Normally, a skeptic seeks the truth that hides beneath a popularly accepted, "official" story. Not so in Amanda's case, unless she views the Babygate "conspiracy" as the new and now official truth.  But she doesn't.  Instead, she is skeptical about reasons people give for doubting Saint Sarah's holy birth story.  You know, those real good solid reasons like Bristol's cuddling Trig a lot.  If her blog post wasn't so rife with ridiculous statements like
... if you believe the theory, you have to accept Bristol conceived a second time while still pregnant
and warnings like
The Palin conspiracy theory seems tailor-made to rob liberals of our moral authority...
and supporting evidence from an article in the UK Sunday Times about women who don't realize they're pregnant, I could let it pass.

Thankfully, Deborah didn't let it pass -- no doubt because Amanda directly discounts Deborah's statement on the topic: "Litbrit claims it would be impossible to fly during labor, because it’s so painful."  That Sarah was in labor comes from Sarah's own words in both newspaper stories and her book.  (That Sarah slightly changes the story with every telling should be telling, but I doubt Amanda has kept up with the evolution!)  That Amanda disputes the assertion of how difficult it would be to fly for 10 hours while in labor should be enough to totally discredit the rest of her "holiday skepticism" post. Fortunately, Deborah does an outstanding job at rebutting the rebuttal.

Saturday, July 03, 2010

Happy Quitter's Day, Enjoy the Potato Salad!

Goodness gracious, one whole year since the quittah from wasilla quitsied!  Thankfully The Mudflats, Palingates, Immoral Minority and Progressive Alaska among others have reminded us about that happy day by posting videos of her breathless, senseless quitter speech so ...

I'm thinking, with a 4-day weekend, time to smoke some ribs and make some lovely potato salad to go with.  I was Googling about how to make some mouthwatering ribs when I came across Meathead's potato salad recipe.  Now, I make a pretty mean potato salad but it never hurts to compare recipes.  In the process, I found this totally jaw-dropping video.  So!  For something completely different (get to at least the 1-minute mark and beyond!), view at your leisure and enjoy your 4th!

Thursday, July 01, 2010

Critical Mass - Reaching for it [UPDATED]

Last August I went to Pittsburgh for a gathering of "mudpuppies" - these are folks who respect and support AKM, the founder and primary author of The Mudflats blog.  Fans across the country have organized several of these gatherings, called "Mudstocks"—a testament to AKM's superb writing on political subjects, but most especially, on Sarah Palin.

On this occasion last August both AKM (now known by her real name, Jeanne Devon) and popular blogger, current radio host, HuffPo contributor, and occasional guest on Countdown, Shannyn Moore were in attendance.  They had just both attended the Netroots Nation convention where Shannyn was surprised and honored to win the Gilliard Grant of Merit, an award named after Steve Gilliard who wrote, "I'm a Fighting Liberal."

Shannyn Moore and AKM, fall 2009, right after their Countdown and Rachel Maddow appearances
I've been a great admirer of AKM since September 2008 when, along with many, I discovered her blog in my quest to find out more about Sarah Palin, this person who was named by John McCain to be his running-mate in the 2008 presidential race.  AKM gave us the inside scoop on Alaska's governor, warts and all, and I was so grateful for her excellent writing, her enduring wit, and her razor-sharp and honest analysis.

I've also admired Shannyn and read her blog, listened to her broadcasts on KUDO Alaska, watched episodes of "Moore up North," and have even phoned in a couple of times to comment and ask questions during her radio show.  During the Pittsburgh Mudstock I shared a brief chat at an outdoor patio table with Shannyn while having a quick cigarette away from the rest of the attendees.

AKM and Shannyn, as far as I saw, are both warm, incredible, lovely, funny, delightful people and nothing I write in this post should be construed to negate that.  The fact remains that they both were building, and now have, reputations as trustworthy voices from the far North, the Alaskan front.

Early on at The Mudflats, AKM determined that discussions about "babygate" would not be allowed.  I imagine this was a rather wise decision at the time, since the rumors that bubbled up were quickly labeled as conspiracy theories. Those who create and propagate labels have an unfair advantage over those who seek the truth in any issue.  Shannyn did speak of and even allowed discussion about Sarah Palin's "wild ride" from time to time, but she resisted going beyond questioning the plausibility of the official scenario.

I don't know AKM's personal feelings on the "babygate" matter.  Shannyn's take is evident in a broadcast you can listen to in audio files included in this post at Phil Munger's Progressive Alaska blog.  Shannyn says the reason Sarah Palin doesn't clear up the questions by once and for all producing a birth certificate for Tri-G or authorizing the release of her own medical records is because holding back "is working for [Sarah]," even though Shannyn is not sure why.  Shannyn tries to make the point that as long as Palin conceals the real truth, she gets to play victim while claiming those evil democrats are out to get her.

Frame from the April 7-8, 2008 video taken by Elan Frank
My take is that a simpler answer to the question "why has Sarah not put an end to the questions?" is because she can't—because she was not pregnant in April '08.  She tries to make it "work for her" as best she can, of course, since she can't make it go away. Any documents related to her pregnancy or the birth of Tri-G would prove she's been lying.

Please take note of the fact that she and her bevy of lawyers have never threatened any of us who have stated publicly that we believe her story is a complete fabrication.  Why is that, when she was so very quick to jump about other things—like Shannyn's reporting about the federal investigation "iceberg" rumors, or Gryphen's Immoral Minority blog reporting about the divorce rumors?

She hasn't even mounted a personal campaign à la the David Letterman joke or the Family Guy criticism.  She simply lets her minions try to marginalize and disparage those who continue to work on the babygate story.  Where are her Facebook entries decrying the efforts made by Andrew Sullivan of the Daily Dish or RPK of Palingates or several others?  Where is the cease and desist order from Thomas Van Flein?

I suppose if you are trying to build your career as a trusted voice in radio, television or the 'net, you might decide it's best to turn a blind eye to certain topics.  As a result, though, Sarah's dark cloud continues to swirl and spread and even if she never gets elected to another political office, the damage she has done over the past many months and the damage she continues to do will take a long time to repair.

Sarah Palin, 11 days before Tri-G's "birth"
It is my firm conviction that should it be revealed that Sarah never did make an oh-so-righteous choice to have a DS baby, her entire pedestal will crumble. She will no longer have even one leg to stand on.  Her most fervent worshipers will have to reconsider their object of devotion and their support of her.

We need to reach critical mass.  That's the point where enough voices with enough substance and respect finally weigh in with their doubts and questions.  That's the point where it is no longer unseemly to ask the vital questions of someone who has most assuredly been running for high political office since July, 2009 when she quit as governor of Alaska.  We could surely benefit from the now respectable voices of The Mudflats and Shannyn Moore.  But thanks to the tireless dedication and documented research of Palingates and others, more and more people are encouraged to speak out.  Visit the Buckeye Surgeon blog for example.

It's time for others to stop being selfish.

UPDATE: Replaced photo of Shannyn and AKM with one that is much better.  Also, just in case I did not make it clear -- I respect the AK bloggers who have decided not to focus on babygate.  At the same time, I wish they would sanction a broader discussion on this topic.  The reason?  Her abysmal ethics and perpetual idiocy can be and are, regularly, excused by most Palin supporters ("so, she misspoke, so what?").  Sarah's courageous and sanctimonious "walking the walk" is her trademark, though.  It is the central supporting column of her political essence. Once it becomes common knowledge that she made it up, we'll stop seeing every Facebook entry and Twitter from this twit reaching headline status, and nobody will suggest that she has any credibility at all as a future political candidate.

Sunday, June 27, 2010

Sarah Palin - Still Takin' It Personally

Mrs. Palin, former part-term, part-time governor of Alaska, swung by Cal State University Stanislaus last Friday.  She called CSU Stanislaus president Hamid Shirvani a bold man for not withdrawing the invitation for her to speak, and made it clear she had heard about the issues her WSB contract created.

She managed to diss, hiss and piss at a whole slew of people but managed to also glorify Glen Beck, falsely credit Ronald Reagan with having grown up and gone to school in California, put down "lowly" Eureka College (Illinois), and confused our Constitution with the "Constitution of Liberty," an essay in which the author explains why he is not a conservative.

For the full video and a transcript of her speech, please refer to this Palingates article.  Here are the noticeable "mean girl" swipes I picked up in the speech:
  • She incorporated "bendy straws" into her routine, making it clear that she was upset that details about her contract were made public.  
  • She chided California's Attorney General "and friends" for bothering to question the CSU Foundation's practices and finances, duly brought to light by her contract. 
  • She pooh-poohed the protesters she never saw thanks to over a mile of chain link fence erected to keep anyone but invited guests off campus.  
  • She maligned the students who found an early version of her contract in the trash bin by calling them "dumpster divers" and insinuating that they were political operatives wasting their time. 
  • She went on to trash talk the student protesters further by quoting Ronald Reagan's dissing of hippies, the one about Tarzan, Jane and a Cheetah. 
  • She even got in a sideways jab at the professors at CSU Stanislaus whose e-mails expressing dismay in the Foundation's choice of a speaker went public. 
  • She still hasn't gotten over the fact that the "lamestream" media noticed the crib notes on her palm, so this too is part of her speech routine no matter where she goes.  
  • And last but not least, she couldn't resist bashing the president and all other elite broad minded intellectuals for seeing shades of gray when there is only black or white, for apologizing for America, for turning their backs on the war on terror and for respecting other cultures even when they are evil.
Any slight, no matter how small (discovering she demanded "bendy straws") or how large (losing the 2008 election), seems to gnaw at her immensely, and she can't help shooting venom at any and all who don't worship and praise her.  This simply can't be good for either her body or her soul.

Sarah, when are you going to stop taking everything personally?  I shudder to think of the new cabinet position you'd need and the huge staff required to keep track of all your "enemies" should you get into a public office. It'd be officer Wooten thousands of times over.

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Rachel Maddow for President (w/Video)

In her program tonight on MSNBC, Rachel gave what she had hoped would be President Obama's speech to the nation last night.

Quite frankly, it was incredible, and I am not using that word lightly.  I will link the video clip here as soon as it is available.

My only hesitation comes from observing that once people are actually elected to office, they seem to change -- were they always just a pawn, or were they bombarded by certain immutable truths about the way the world works after they gain office?  I wish I knew.

UPDATE: here's the video:

Friday, June 11, 2010

Alvin Greene - How Did He Win?

Alvin Greene
If you've watched or listened to any of half a dozen interviews with South Carolina's recently elected Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, your head is probably spinning just like mine is.  Here one interview with Fox News' Shepard Smith.  And here's another with the New York Times, and yet another with MSNBC's Keith Olbermann (YouTube). Be forewarned if you are not already up on this story, the videos are painful to watch.  IMO, Alvin Greene is hardly U.S. Senate material.

Vic Rawl
As Alvin Greene notes, "60% of the vote is not luck." So how did this fellow, who seems not to have campaigned at all for the position (no campaign war chest, no Web site, no rallies or events), wind up beating a much more legitimate contender, Vic Rawl?  House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC) is calling for an investigation and suggesting that Mr. Greene is someone's "plant."  In other words, he questions how this unemployed veteran (who was let go by both the Air Force and the Army) who qualified as an indigent just a few months ago (Greene was assigned a public defender on a felony porn charge) was able to come up with the filing fee of over $10,000.

What to me is even more intriguing is how, apparently, 100,000 people voted for him.  Some suggest his name was on the top, alphabetically.  Others say that since you can vote for any candidate regardless of how you are registered in SC, there must have been a large number of Republicans who added to the vote total in an effort to get the most ineffective Democratic candidate possible to run against incumbent Senator Jim DeMint.

Bottom line, though, even if he was planted in the race, he obviously did not do what it takes to run away with the vote from an established politician.  Bradblog adds some very important, albeit disturbing, information to the picture:
But the "plant" theory doesn't explain the extraordinary numbers that Greene reportedly received at the polls on Tuesday, if not in the absentee voting. While it's possible all of this could be an issue of dirty tricks by Republicans who are allowed to vote in SC's open primary, there were, apparently, no known efforts by the GOP to push for Greene votes --- certainly not enough to account for the staggering 59 to 41 victory Greene reportedly sailed to on Tuesday.
Brad Friedman goes on to explain: 
South Carolina uses ES&S' 100% unverifiable Direct Recording Electronic (DRE, in this case touch-screen) voting machines at the polling place. The machines, also used in many other states (such as Arkansas, where we recently reported exclusively on the disappearance of thousands of votes on May 18th, which neither state or local officials are able to explain to this day) are both oft-failed and easily manipulated in such a way that it's almost impossible to detect the systems have been gamed.
Welcome to red flag time, as reported by Politico:
In Lancaster County, Rawl won absentee ballots over Greene by a staggering 84 percent to 16 percent margin; but Greene easily led among Election Day voters by 17 percentage points.
What could possibly explain why Rawl succeeded so swimmingly in the absentee ballots and yet failed so miserably in the votes supposedly cast on South Carolina's Diebold machines?  Politico goes on to report:
In Spartanburg County, [Rawl campaign manager Walter] Ludwig said there are 25 precincts in which Greene received more votes than were actually cast and 50 other precincts where votes appeared to be missing from the final count. 

"In only two of 88 precincts, do the number of votes Greene got plus the number we got equal the total cast," Ludwig said.
Please visit and support Bradblog and BlackBoxVoting.org, who have been on the case of these paperless, record-free voting machines for a decade. What happened in the South Carolina Democratic primary may not have a significant impact in the overall scheme of things, since everyone seems to have confidence that Senator DeMint will win his re-election bid no matter who he runs against.  But our lack of attention or interest in how we vote and how our votes are counted invites unscrupulous partisans to mess with the voice of the people. Beyond figuring out who gave the 10G to Alvin Greene, let's make sure we figure out how the staggering disparities in this SC race happened.

Friday, June 04, 2010

Palin Moratorium - Possible Pros

I'm a frequent reader of HuffPo and other online outlets that publish stories about Sarah Palin. I regularly see comments along the line of, "Why are you giving this idiot any space? I just wish she'd GO AWAY!" That got me to thinking... could we help make her go away? She holds no elected position and has not declared that she is running for one (yet). She's touted as some sort of political celebrity cum Teabag leader but even the Republican establishment is wary of being too closely tied to this "rogue." So why does she get national coverage when she has someone post a controversial statement on her Facebook (ffs!) page? I think part of it is that many people publicly take issue with how ridiculous those posts are. She's a train wreck in slow motion and we can't help but watch and talk about it.

I realize that implementing this notion will take concurrence by many other people besides me, but if there is a general consensus that this experiment is worthwhile, I'll do my best to recruit others to honor a moratorium for a yet-to-be-decided time period.

Here are a few reasons it might be good to experiment by voluntarily engaging in a limited-duration moratorium on writing or commenting (or even reading) about her latest speech to the Bowling Ball association or her Twitters or Facebook rants.

  1. Starve the beast
  2. Take a break, get perspective
  3. Laws of physics

Starving the beast: we know for a fact that Mrs. Palin thrives on attention. What if we don't give her, for a brief period, the attention she lives for? My guess is she'll up the ante and say even more outrageous things than usual (or not, see Laws of physics below). We can keep track, make notes, and once the moratorium is over we will have lots of fresh material to work with and some extra time to do research and careful writing. Also, too, nature abhors a vacuum. If we don't call her out, maybe we'll create an opening for someone else who would not ordinarily do so. Remember, I'm only talking about a 10-day period here as an experiment. Let's also call this the "giving her plenty of rope" tactic.

Taking a break: many of us, myself included, swim in her polluted waters daily and our "OMG-NoSheDi'int!" meters have gone off the scale so many times that it may be time to recalibrate. There are a lot of other awful, sad, horrible and desperate events happening in our world. There are also other aspects of life worth rewarding, appreciating, and soaking up.  Taking a brief break would give us a chance to regain some perspective on the foulness of the wind blowing from her pie-hole and possibly regenerate the kind of energy that will support us in the months ahead.  I'm not suggesting we'll find her any less despicable, hypocritical, or ridiculous after a 10-day break. But we may be better able to articulate why she deserves calling out instead of just coming up with new ways to say, "This woman is an idiot."

Laws of physics: you've heard that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. I think this can apply to the metaphysical world as well. That is, if we push back against her insanity, she feels the need to overcome that with something else. Our attention may actually be providing the incentive she needs to continue her crazy. It's a given that her die-hard followers are not swayed by truth or reason, so we might actually be vivifying her cult following by pointing out her routine inanities. After all, where would the Sea of Pee be without some of our more prolific bloggers to flog?

There are probably several possible cons to my suggestion, and I would happily host a guest post to give voice to those.  You'll find my e-mail address in my blogger profile—just drop me a note or write your comments here.

Don't forget to vote in the poll over there on the left at least!

Thursday, June 03, 2010

Would This Help or Hurt? (POLL)

Like many of you I suffer from Palin fatigue now and again.  She is a nobody yet she finds a way to insert herself, via Twitter and Facebook, into every hot topic that comes along and the giant online echo chamber magnifies and multiplies her upside-down world screeching.  If nothing else is going on she'll make up something to be outraged about.

So the question is (please vote in the poll on the left): what if we set aside a week or two where we just didn't pay attention to any of her stupefying antics?  What would happen?  Would we explode?  Would she?

For my part, I'd promise not to blog about anything Palin, nor would I read or comment on any other stories that featured her.

Of course, if during that period she tries to be somebody again, say by running for public office, I think it would be my -- and all of our -- responsibility to remind everyone of who she's proven herself to be.

We could start a Facebook group to promote the idea and get buy-in: "Ignoring Sarah Palin for her own good!"  Or something like that... What do you think?

Wednesday, June 02, 2010

Yes, Now I Get It... NOT!

Extreme Greenies:see now why we push"drill,baby,drill"of known reserves&promising finds in safe onshore places like ANWR? Now do you get it?

Tuesday, June 01, 2010

Says Sarah, Adjusting Her Halo, "What Ugly Innuendo?"

McGinniss has followed us for some time now, from showing up on our doorstep last winter, bidding over $60,000 for a military charity auction dinner with me, writing the hit pieces, attending at least one Outside book event, etc. He has a right to pursue his subject, I suppose, and certainly has a right to live wherever he wants, but my family also has a right to expect privacy, and hopefully to enjoy peace this summer. Good fences do make for good neighbors. The fence is now up, and I hope that we can enjoy peace. The media sensationalizes the recent McGinniss’ tactic so the public will tune in to whatever the latest episode is, always with ratings in mind, and that’s unfortunate.
So wrote Mrs. Todd Palin in a Facebook note today. She's upset because NBC didn't blank out their own cameras to display this message while Matt Lauer interviewed Joe McGinniss on Good Morning America.  Let's take a look at what she's said.
  1. McGinniss has been following them for some time now. This is a "so what?" moment, isn't it?  Who hasn't been following the Palinpalooza for a while now?  I'm sure he's not the only one to show up on their doorstep.  In fact, I recall vividly Greta Van Susteren doing just that.  
  2. He bid on the charity auction she put up on eBay, the one where bids started at $25,000!  Oh my god, the nerve of the man!  She neglects to say that she reserved the right to eliminate people she didn't want to dine with, and that's what she did to Joe.  She should be happy that the dinner winner ended up paying more than 60K thanks to his bidding, which only further helped the charity.  
  3. Now we come to "the hit pieces."  I know of one piece titled "Pipe Dreams" that clearly pointed out the lie she'd been telling about having gotten a gas line project underway, supplying energy to the hungry markets in the lower 48, or some such.  It wasn't a "hit piece," it was a carefully researched article on the likelihood that the AGIA, which Sarah Palin touted as proof of her mastery of energy issues, would never be built in spite of her implying it was a done deal. Oh, and then there's the "hit piece" where Joe McGinniss noticed that the carefully crafted illusion of Palin's bus tour was, essentially, a hoax.  I guess if you print the truth and it happens to contradict the illusion Sarah Palin is trying to create, that makes you a despicable peeper and potential pervert.
  4. And for crying out loud, Joe McGinniss had the temerity to attend a book signing event during the months-long amazing bus tour?  How dare he tell the world about the bus hoax? 
As a gentle reminder to the wacky Wasilla witch, the media would have known nothing—nada—about Joe McGinniss renting the house next door, or even your fence-building, without you broadcasting it via your safely insulated Facebook page and following it up with your whining to Glenn Beck.  You created the situation, you incited your cult following, and should anything happen to McGinniss, you will be squarely to blame.  Do you really believe your own garbage?  From the same Facebook note, Sarah innocently muses,
I’m not sure what “ugly innuendo” was in my Facebook post or why it is so controversial to suggest that the presence of a hostile “journalist” writing a hostile book about me is an imposition on my children who simply want to enjoy their summer outside.

I am quite sure what "ugly innuendo" was in your Facebook post.  Did all the vile accusations and deadly threats from your followers towards Joe McGinniss come out of nowhere??? 

That you say you can't see it proves you are immensely dense or intentionally deceptive.  That you double down on it in this short sentence tells me you are still blowing the dog whistle for your faithful sarasites.  That a neighbor wants to write a book about you, how is that an imposition on your children?  Why do you ALWAYS drag your children out in front of you and use them as a shield?  You act much more like a sniveling, deceitful cur than a fearsome grizzly bear.

Saturday, May 29, 2010

Playing the Sex Card Since 1996

We normally disdain those who "play the race card" to get where they want. President Obama had to walk a very fine line but managed to avoid eliciting a sympathy vote because the color of his skin was out of the mainstream of previous candidates for the presidency.

But what about "playing the sex card?"

I propose that Sarah Palin has made liberal use of this card, very liberal use, especially when compared to other female political figures in recent history. To test this statement, I'll ask you to link up a public figure with the following statements:

She's a MILF!
I'd do her.
I think she is a tremendously sexy woman.

Let's see... are all these three referring to Hillary Clinton? How about Dianne Feinstein? Angela Merkel? Maybe Olympia Snowe. No? Margaret Thatcher? Geraldine Ferraro? Sorry, all wrong.

Women in politics have had to overcome barriers that their male counterparts never encountered. There are two ways to succeed in this male-dominated arena: Be more intelligent, more engaged and more thoughtful, or, be more coy and more sexy and focus on men's smaller heads. (Sorry, guys... not all of you.)

Sarah (Mrs. Todd) Palin has been playing the sex card for a long time. She was not all that attractive but with a little plastic surgery here and a few hair extensions there and plenty of Redbulls in between, she can prance onstage in an immodestly short skirt and sparkly high heels and rev up several "small heads" in whatever audience she addresses. Do not underestimate her charm when it comes to well-meaning but basically cowed males wishing for a female dominant to shackle, spank and teach them!

These days, if a guy in politics says anything against Mrs. Palin, that guy is labeled "misogynistic," a guy who hates women. Yet, she consistently presses forth the fact she is a woman. She consistently presses forth the fact that she has children. She consistently presses forth the notion that her children are being sexually abused. Which of those other woman politicians named above ever mentioned their children as any excuse for griping or bashing? None that I can see.

She consistently proffers Todd to go do the dirty work. Look, if a writer took up residence next door to me, I would go talk to him myself, I wouldn't send my alter-ego husband to do it. What does that say for her ability to handle anything?

Sarah Palin hides behind her husband and her children regularly. I know of NO other female politician who crumbles at the slightest affront. I also know of NO other female politician who has a cult following. (See conservatives4palin.com if you doubt me.)

There is something very, very wrong with this woman and the press she seems to get, even though she has NEVER opened herself to real questions from a real reporter since the Katie Couric mishap back before the 2008 election.

I am a woman. Thanks to the civil rights fight to give me a vote I can express my druthers in local, state and national elections. Thanks to a general acceptance of women in the field of technology, I manage to earn a living. Thanks to Sarah Palin, I and my sisters are in danger of being set back a century. I will raise my voice wherever I can and fight with whatever I have to make sure that backsliding never happens.

What other politician wanna-be ever.. EVER... had this: 'This Is Not Sarah Palin Inflatable Love Doll' Released By Topco Sales???

Monday, May 24, 2010

The Constitution and Mrs. Palin - Part 3

The First Amendment - Establishment Clause

Amendment I of the Constitution begins, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." This says to me that no single religious dogma trumps any other in our country.  Yet Mrs. Palin has been going around the country espousing and promoting the notion that the United States is a Christian country, founded on the Judeo-Christian belief set.


In an appearance on Fox channel with Bill O'Reilly (VIDEO), while discussing a court's recent finding that it is unconstitutional for the Federal government to declare a "National Day of Prayer," Mrs. Palin affirms, "I have said all along that America is based on Judeo-Christian beliefs and, uh you know, nobody has to believe me though, uh, you can just go to our Founding Fathers’ early documents and see how they crafted a Declaration of Independence and a Constitution that um allows that Judeo-Christian belief to be the foundation of our laws and our Constitution, of course, uh, essentially acknowledging that our unalienable rights don’t come from man. They come from God."

The term "Judeo-Christian" first came into use during the Second World War. It was not part of the settlers' or the founders' vocabulary when the Declaration of Independence was written. Basically, Judeo-Christian necessarily refers to the tiny intersection of beliefs held in common by adherents of Christianity and those of Judaism.  In an article titled The Judeo-Christian Oxymoron, author David E. Ross notes wisely, "Actually, an appeal to Judeo-Christian values usually reflects an attempt to generate Jewish support for a political agenda that many Jews who are well educated in their religion would reject."

Further in Mrs. Palin's session with O'Reilly, she goes on to say, "I think we should just kinda keep this clean, keep it simple. Go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant -- they're quite clear -- that um we would uh create law based on the God of the bible and the ten commandments. It's pretty simple."

If our founders truly desired that laws reflect the ten commandments, why did they not legislate against carving statues of anything in the heavens, on the earth or under the seas? Why is there no punishment when people take God's name in vain? Where is the law that says you can't go to movies or mow lawns on Sunday? And oh dear, of course, why did the founders fail to demand that husbands or wives who cheat on each other be stoned to death?

To which God, and to whose bible does Mrs. Palin refer?  The vengeful Old Testament God who forbids us to eat shellfish and despises homosexual behavior, or the New Testament God that claims Jesus as his Son, the same Christ who is every Mark Souder's refuge when he gets caught committing adultery?  But wouldn't either of these be a God firmly identified with a particular religion?

President John Adams, our 4th President, signed the Treaty of Tripoli that was passed unanimously in 1797: "The United States government is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."

John F. Kennedy, a Catholic (like Mrs. Palin was before switching to Pentecostalism) and our 35th President said, "I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute."

Thomas Paine, founding father, wrote, "My country is the world, and my religion is to do good."

If our country truly was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs, I find it odd that Article 6, Section 3 of our Constitution says, "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

James Madison, another founding father, said, "Religion and Government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."

And Thomas Jefferson, rascally founding father that he was, said, "Question with boldness even the existence of a God."  No wonder Texas wants to remove him from their history textbooks.
--o--o--o--o--
I wonder what Mrs. Palin and friends would say if our Congress ordained a "National Week of the Hajj," or a "National Day of Tantric Sex," or a "National Month of Meditation and Silence."
--o--o--o--o--