Bauer and Allot Have It SO Wrong

Politico published an article three days ago titled "Trig Palin has divided America," by Gary Bauer (yes, that Gary Bauer) and Daniel Allot.  It starts out like this:

A year ago, Palin gave birth to her youngest son, Trig, who has Down syndrome. Since then, mother and son have become objects of the left’s unrelenting scorn and the right’s unflinching fidelity.

There's so much wrong with this article it is hard to know where to start.  First of all, it is not possible that Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig.  There's no evidence to support this birth and a whole lot of evidence to the contrary (<-- read some of the older posts on this blog). If you have not thought to challenge the story yet, you have quite a ride ahead of you.  If you are a blue pill sort of person, you may as well just go back to sleep.  If you are inquisitive and seek truth, take the red pill and use the brain you were born with.  Or just read back through my posts on this topic.

The authors of the aforementioned article go on to assert that:

Palin is controversial, in part, because America is divided over disability. We’ve established laws and institutions that protect people with disabilities. But we also do everything we can to make sure they don’t see the light of day.

According to Bauer and Allot, Palin stands opposed to "powerful trends," the thrust of which would just as soon eliminate "an entire class of people," the disabled.  The 'Right to Birth' crowd and the families that include a person with a disability (400,000 of them?) flock to Palin because of the courage of her choice. Somehow this means that others who have no idea what this choice entails have a hatred for Palin because of her choice.

What Bauer and Allot don't touch is the fact that whoever birthed Trig presumably had a choice, a choice that Sarah Palin would do her best to deny to you and me. 

Whether or not you have a family member with a serious disability, you can probably imagine that caring for that dear one requires educating oneself about the condition, plus spending lots of time and probably lots of money getting professional assistance to help that dear one live the best life he or she can under the circumstances.

The image above shows just one instance of many when Sarah was on the campaign trail.  She held Trig up as her certificate of passage into the club of the real-life pro-birthers.  This baby is staring up at thousands of watts of spotlights, and the noise from the cheering Sarasites at the Republican National Convention is no doubt deafening—at least to a baby that can hear.  To this day we have heard nothing but platitudes from Trig's assumed mother about supporting children with birth defects.  We see Sarah in Running World magazine talking about how great it feels to burn, to get hot, when she runs.  We see Sarah in Twitter decrying an Alaskan blogger who posted an image for a day that replaced Trig's face with that of a talk show host with whom Sarah has a very cozy relationship.  We see six- or seven-year-old Piper struggling to lug Trig around, sometimes while she is precariously perched in high heels.

But what we don't see is the kind of care Trig is getting, the sacrifices that any mother with a Down syndrome baby would have to make to get frequent checkups and special therapy.  We also don't see Sarah as Governor making positive steps toward funding for special services, or promoting the kinds of organizations in her own state that are instrumental in providing for and helping families with disabled members.

Here's what we do see.  Sarah signing autographs on the body of a child who is not enjoying the spectacle:

For a closer look, I rotated and cropped the image.  You tell me if this young one appreciates this particular photo-op:

Bauer and Allot have it so wrong.  Those of us who see Sarah Palin for who she is (and who she isn't) do not despise people who are born with disabilities.  We may want to retain the option to choose whether or not we take on a lifetime of effort and expense to take care of a mal-formed or severely disabled child.  But we do not "hate" Sarah Palin because she claims Trig is her burden, or her joy, from her god.  More power to those who have the resources and the time to nurture and care for those disabled from birth.

But a pox on those who claim that mantle, that halo, when it is not theirs to take.  And that, dear readers, is exactly what Sarah Palin is doing.  If you have any doubts, do the research.  If you have any doubts, remember that Trig is and has been her "ticket to ride."  The least you could do is verify the facts.  You'll find she has provided none of her own.  If you still have doubts, just start adding up all the times she has lied or exaggerated or twisted the actual truth in any number of other issues.  I do not think she can tell the truth, the whole truth.

Another Politico article, this one by Steve Seckler, says:

But what I really think cemented Sarah Palin’s most loyal following and elevated her personal mystique to a level transcendent of her politics was the single most selfless decision of her life: to give birth to her son Trig. That seemed the case among many at my 4th of July parade, including those who I know never attend church and would rather talk combines and corn borers than abortion or gay marriage.
[snip]
To Palin’s supporters as well as many who are not, no diva smirk or vapid interview response can ever say as much about her as the image of her nursing Trig on the Straight Talk Express.

That is exactly why we must continue to educate others and spread the truth about Sarah's amazing hoax regarding Trig.

The foregoing is my personal opinion regarding the hoax that Sarah birthed Trig, and especially that she nursed Trig.  Look at the Republican National Conventions pictures again.  Tell me who in the Palin family, if anyone, actually nursed Trig.

Lies.  More lies.  Red pill or blue, it's up to you.

It's 21 22 Ethics Complaints, Not 18 ... But Who's Counting? (updated again and again)

Sarah Palin has so many ethics complaints that major news outlets can't keep track anymore! Huffington Post reprinted an AP story by Rachel D'Oro yesterday claming the current number is 18 instead of what appears to be 21 22. In order to keep the record straight, we need a list!

Since no list is worth anything without supporting documentation, you can find links for ethics complaints numbers 1 through 18 at Newsminer and also at Alaska Daily News (ADN).

Find a link for number 19 here,
a link for number 20 here (even though the article misstates number as 19),
a link for number 21 here,
and a link for number 22 here.

Without further ado, here are the 21 22 acknowledged complaints (there may have been more that were just never made public) against Sarah Palin and her administration as of July 15 16 20, 2009.

#	Date	Filer	Description	Results
1	7/28/08	Alaska Legislature	Abuse of Power re: firing Walt Monegan (aka Troopergate)	10/10/08 Sarah Palin found guilty of abuse of power for permitting husband and staff to harangue Monegan about the trooper
2	8/06/08	Andree McLeod (AK resident)	Undue influence exerted by Palin and staff exerted to get a job for a Palin supporter	Palin staff member advised to take ethics training
3	8/20/08	Brian Kraft (AK resident)	Breaking election law by taking public position on ballot initiative concerning Pebble Mine	05/08/09 Complaint rejected by APOC (Alaska Public Offices Commission)
4	9/02/08	Sarah Palin (AK resident)	Self-disclosure filing with AK Personnel Board (re: Troopergate)	11/03/08 Personnel Board found no abuse of power for Sarah Palin letting aides and husband hassle Monegan, but also, no investigation of who committed perjury in their contradictory sworn statements, Palin or Monegan
5	9/03/08	PSEA (AK Public Safety Employees Association)	Improper disclosure of the trooper's personnel records and amended to include allegation of harassment (bundled with charge #4)	11/03/08 Dismissed together with #4 by AK Personnel Board
6	10/13/08	Walt Monegan (AK resident)	Request by filer for a hearing to clear his name (it had been sullied by Palin and staff)	11/03/08 AK Personnel Board said there was no legal basis or jurisdiction for a hearing on this matter
7	10/23/08	CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics)	Expensive wardrobe purchased for Sarah Palin with donor money violates FEC regulations	05/19/09 FEC ruled "party money" is not covered in ban
8	10/24/08	unnamed filer	Abuse of power for charging AK for children's travel	02/23/09 AK Personnel Board negotiated settlement wherein Sarah Palin paid ~$8,000 to reimburse for costs
9	11/14/08	Zane Henning (AK resident)	Alleged abuse of office by doing "post-election damage control" in interviews from Governor's office	03/23/09 Dismissed by AK Personnel Board
10	12/02/08	Anthony Martin (AK resident)	Sarah Palin violated ethics by campaigning for Saxby Chambliss of Georgia	03/23/09 Dismissed by AK Personnel Board
11	12/18/08	unnamed filer	Alleged misuse of funds by allowing her picture to be used to promote Alaska seafood in national publications while also promoting her national political ambitions	01/12/09 Dismissed by AK Personnel Board
12	01/12/09	Edna Birch	Interference in job hiring	02/20/09 Dismissed by AK Personnel Board because filer failed to use a real name
13	01/26/09	Andree McLeod (AK resident)	Palin aide Bill McAllister worked on state time to benefit Palin's extra-AK political interests	PENDING
14	01/26/09	Andree McLeod (AK resident)	Palin aide Kris Perry worked on state time to benefit Palin's extra-AK political interests	06/05/09 Dismissed by AK Personnel Board
15	03/18/09	Andree McLeod (AK resident)	Improper use of state resources for partisan political purposes	05/27/09 Dismissed by AK Personnel Board
16	03/24/09	Linda Kellen Biegel (AK resident)	Conflict of interest by advertising for husband's sponsor by wearing Arctic Cat gear during official duties	06/02/09 Dismissed by AK Personnel Board
17	04/22/09	Sondra Tompkins (AK resident)	SarahPAC constitutes ethics violation by misusing official position and accepting outside employment	05/08/09 Dismissed by AK Personnel Board
18	04/27/09	Kim Chatman (AK resident)	Alaska Fund Trust (AFT) violates ethics rules by funneling improper gifts to Sarah Palin	06/24/2010 PALIN SETTLES - has to return $386,000 because AFT declared illegal.
19	07/06/09	Zane Henning (AK resident)	Illegal continuation of per diem collection when Sarah Palin's home is less than 50 miles from Anchorage office	PENDING
20	07/10/09	Ray Ward (AK resident)	Illegal compensation collected by Sarah Palin for giving radio and television interviews since '08 campaign ended	PENDING 07/15/09 Dismissed by AK Personnel Board (in part for not being properly notarized)
21	07/14/09	Andree McCleod (AK resident)	Failure to transfer power to Lt. Gov during '08 campaign, while collecting salary during "off duty" status	PENDING 07/24/09 Dismissed by AK Personnel Board as legally flawed
22	07/20/09	Andree McCleod (AK resident)	Failure to disclose gifts within 30 days of receipt	PENDING

To summarize the 21 22 complaints we know about:

One found Sarah Palin abused her power.

One found Sarah Palin illegally solicited funds for her personal use while Governor.

Two were dismissed by the Personnel Board with various repercussions.

Eleven Twelve were dismissed by the Personnel Board with no other actions.

One was rejected by APOC.

One was rejected by the FEC.

Five Four Three are still pending resolution.

The AK Personnel Board has consistently refused to affix any finding of fault. As a reminder, this group of three persons is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the Governor.

---

Go figure, eh?

Who's for the Talibanization of America?

In a sort of follow-on from the last post...

A few weeks ago I was reading the comments on Phil Munger's outstanding blog, Progressive Alaska.  An anonymous person left a comment under one of his posts that almost shook me off my chair (and that's not an easy thing to do).  Here is part of what 'anonymous' said:

My goal for this country is for the god of the Bible to be in charge of the leaders of this country. If the leaders of this country are NOT Born Again Christians, than [sic] they should not be allowed to hold office.

My goal is for English to be the National Language.

My goal is for homosexuality to be against the law as it is an abomination to God.

My goal is for the Bible to be taught to our children as The way to live a moral and just life.

My goal would be to rid our televisions electronic games and media of all the sex and violence.

A real person said this.  I did not make it up.

Between then and now I did a little research on the proscriptions enforced by the Taliban.  Before I print this, please know that most Muslims do not subscribe to the more extremist view of Sharia Law that is reflected below.  But there are extremists in every religion and the Taliban who are currently operating in parts of Afghanistan and in a certain section of southern Pakistan seem intent on enforcing these rather strict social rules.

From "Life under the Taliban:"

The Taliban have issued edicts forbidding women from working outside the home, except in limited circumstances in the medical field.

The Taliban prohibit girls from attending school.

Women and girls are not allowed to appear outside the home unless wearing a head to toe covering called the burqa.

Women are also forbidden from appearing in public with a male who is not their relative.

Acceptable punishments for these infractions are public hangings, amputation of limbs, and stonings.

And this, by Jan Goodwin, Echo NYC (sorry, the link was no longer functional):

Claiming that they are restoring Afghanistan to the "purity of Islam," the Taliban regime has "expunged all leisure activities. Their list of what is illegal grows daily: music, movies and television, picnics, wedding parties, New Year celebrations, any kind of mixed-sex gathering. They've also banned children's toys, including dolls and kites; card and board games; cameras; photographs and paintings of people and animals; pet parakeets; cigarettes and alcohol; magazines and newspapers, and most books. They've even forbidden applause -- a moot point, since there's nothing left to applaud."

According to another source, Religious Tolerance, we read:

Within Sharia law, there are a group of "Haram" offenses which carry severe punishments. These include pre-marital sexual intercourse, sex by divorced persons, post-marital sex, adultery, false accusation of unlawful intercourse, drinking alcohol, theft, and highway robbery. Haram sexual offenses can carry a sentence of stoning to death or severe flogging.

(Can you imagine the trouble some of our legislators would be in, were we to adopt similar 'laws?')

And finally, some other general proscriptions include:

1. Shaving one's beard
2. Flying kites
3. Gambling
4. Music and dancing at weddings
5. Displaying pictures or portraits (idolatry)
6. Broadcasting music in any shop or business location

If we go back to the person who left the comment at Progressive Alaska and compare his or her goals with the laws for which one can be stoned to death or suffer amputations, do you see a lot of difference?

• A leader must be a born-again Christian.  So, we should strive to become a theocracy?
• No language other than English will be tolerated.  I suppose this is an attempt to deny the multiculturalism that has made our country so great.
• Homosexuality is illegal, and presumably punished severely.  My 'god' doesnt care about sexual orientation; that is not what is important at the end of the day.
• All children must be indoctrinated using the 'christian' bible.  So much for freedom of, or from, religion. This flies in the face of our country's founding ideals.
  
• No more sex or violence on TV, in games, or media.  Might want to talk to the US Military who use sex and violence in games to train troops.  Not saying I approve, but this sounds a lot like no TV, no music, and no games period.  Not a far cry from no kites, no dancing or music at weddings, and death for sexual offenses.
  

The anonymous person who so fervently laid out his/her goals should really do a little studying, and maybe, just maybe, he or she might notice that the stated goals are not at all dissimilar to those held by one of America's sworn enemies.

We need to be vigilant in finding and disarming any movement in this country that seeks to impose a particular moral regime on everyone.  It's fine with me if you want to grow your beard or wear a burqa.  But don't tell me I can't dance and sing at weddings or fly kites or keep a parakeet or only vote for a person who claims to be a born-again Christian.

This is our country.  You vote for who you want.  So will I.

H&HT takes a small side path for a moment

A person's religious faith should be a private thing.  Or at least that's how I view it.  I recall a passage in the Christian bible's New Testament about how you should go into your closet and pray instead of standing on the streetcorner, because if you pray in public your reward will be of the temporal world and what you really want is a reward in the eternal world.  Besides, inner conviction and conscience are such intensely personal things.  It is one thing to study or practice various devotions with others.  It is a totally other thing to attempt to coerce, scare, prey upon or cajole people to join your particular morality club—as if your passage into some wonderful hereafter depended on how many followers you could number.

Throughout her life my mother kept searching for the right church and the right pastor who would give the right message.  For a time we were Jehovah's Witnesses. In an attempt to be counted among the 144,000 who would be saved (yes, only 144 thousand) she would take hold of the official version of the bible sanctioned by the Witnesses and go door to door spreading the good word and the Witnesses' literature.  At some point she must have realized that she wouldn't make it into that elite group, and we stopped going to the Kingdom Hall.

I was, according to what I've been told, baptized Lutheran.  But in addition to the years spent as a Jehovah's Witness, I believe that mom went to Baptist and Methodist and maybe even Universalist churches.  Later on she found an evangelist who was on television and who published books with which she was enthralled for a while.  She used to exchange the latest little booklets with her brother's wife who also was enamored of this same evangelist.  Her brother, my uncle, was more the scientific sort and as far as I know, simply tolerated his wife's fervor for this "prophet." 

When mom and my step-dad retired to run a small gas station/convenience store in rural Arkansas, she became a ditto-head—yes, a Rush Limbaugh devotee.  She searched the local churches for some place she felt comfortable, but I don't think she ever found one.  On more than one visit there, I remember seeing little hand-printed signs stuck on the shelves next to cans of pinto beans, Spam and 6-packs of Oreo cookies.  The signs read, "Ditto-heads welcome here!" And, "Proud to be politically incorrect."

Until the day my mother died, she seemed convinced that I was a godless hippie and an incorrigible, despicable liberal.  Rush had found a permanent place in her psyche.  I think she still had a few friends who commiserated with her views, but she never found a better congregation than the clumps of ditto-heads who faithfully listened to Rush's AM broadcasts.

Which brings me to why I write about any of this today.  Two ladies, somewhat more aged than I, knocked on my door today.  They clutched handsful of small pamphlets that they offered to me.  The first lady inquired if I was a Christian.  I replied, no, I was not affiliated with any one major religion.  They told me they wanted to invite me to their Baptist church down the street and they wanted to make sure that I knew that their religion was the only one who had a figurehead who had risen from the dead for me, and therefore, was the one true religion.

I do not disparage these sweet ladies' religious preferences.  I informed them that I had studied—at length—most of the world's major religions and that I found remarkable similarities in all of them, by way of explaining that I understood and appreciated each path.  They continued to remind me that there was only one true faith: theirs.  I asked them if they had ever spent any time looking at other major religions' holy books.  They hadn't, and looked puzzled that I would even ask such a question.

The front porch visit ended with them telling me that they would pray for me.  I thanked them, but thought to myself that their words were a tad condescending, and that their energy might be better spent in other endeavors.

I honestly don't mind when Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses or just the local Baptist church ladies come to my door with their messages of redemption or whatever.  What I do mind is when people get it in their heads that their way is the only right way and they purposely infiltrate the political structure in order to be in a position to legislate their particular flavor of morality.

If I stand barefooted doing an esoteric dance, a legominism, at dawn on the Soltices and the Equinoxes, or if I don a robe and perform the Sema on December 17, or if I practice green meditation with a Buddhist monk, or if I chant "La illa ha illala" while sitting in the morning, or if I peruse the Kabbalah, or if the last thing I say before laying down to sleep is, "Lord, have mercy," that is my business and I would never insist that anyone join me.  The spiritual journey is necessarily unique for each person.

For what it's worth, I am not afraid of Sarah Palin because I think she stands a snowball's chance of succeeding in gaining a national political office.  But I am dreadfully wary of what she represents in the religious arena.  Extreme religious views such as the ones I suspect she feeds on, views that insist on a sectarian takeover of every major aspect of life in our country, give me chills.  If I may, "Thanks, but no thanks, to anyone who doesn't understand why we must maintain a clear separation between church and state."

Cataloguing 32 Lies Told by Sarah Palin

Andrew Sullivan of The Daily Dish has a post out today that tells the story, line by line, of how (un)trustworthy Sarah Palin is, called The Odd Lies Of Sarah Palin: A Round-Up.

He prefaces his triple-checked list of lies with,

After you have read these, ask yourself: what wouldn't Sarah Palin lie about if she felt she had to?

I'm not sure where Sullivan is going with this, but he makes a pretty solid case that Our Lady of the Iquitarod's words should be taken with a large grain of salt. 

The sad part is, statements that have issued from her mouth have simply been accepted without verification since she came on the national scene.  Where have all the journalists gone, long time passing?

When will we ever learn?

The House That Sarah Built - continued....

Over the last few months I've watched traffic on my little blog, and there has been one story in particular that is revisited, consistently, more than others :  The House That Sarah Built.

Based on a story first exposed by The Village Voice, I raised further questions and provided some images that to me seemed to indicate that some features of the Palin House on Lake Wasilla looked a lot like the features in the multi-million-dollar Wasilla Sports Complex.

Sarah and Todd's house as a backdrop, friends and family standing by as she resigns

Many readers who have paid attention to the various palin-gates (and many dedicated bloggers who also picked up on this story) have pointed to this "house-gate" as possibly the one that finally sticks on Sarah and Todd.

Today, after Ms. "Don't You Want To Do Me" Palin tendered her resignation as Governor of Alaska, I read this story by Max Blumenthal in the Daily Beast:  Did a Scandal Sink the U.S.S Palin?

Though Todd Palin told Fox News he built his Lake Lucille home with the help of a few "buddies," according to Barrett’s report, public records revealed that SBS supplied the materials for the house. While serving as mayor of Wasilla, Sarah Palin blocked an initiative that would have required the public filing of building permits—thus momentarily preventing the revelation of such suspicious information.

Is it possible that the iceberg heading Sarah's way—and the reason she so abruptly and clumsily resigned—has something to do with a real investigation into just where the building materials came from for the house outside of which she stood today as she quit her current job?

Inquiring minds really want to know. 

Governor Sarah Palin RESIGNS

Quickie post here, I'm sure you all have heard the surprising news...  here's my prediction on some of the REAL reasons for this July 3rd Friday holiday weekend announcement:

1. SarahPAC is not going to report the kind of income that she'll need to move into the big league for a 2012 campaign.
2. Her "defense fund" (Alaska Fund Trust) is also not raking in nearly enough money to help pay for existing legal bills in addition to paying to defend her against upcoming ethics complaints.
3. There is, in addition to more troublesome ethics complaints, some big investigation in the wings, either from the IRS or the FBI or both.  This is not something she is going to be able to get her Personnel Board to take care of.
4. She figured she'd better throw in the towel now by committing sepuku, essentially, in the hopes that she will not figure very highly on the radar when the real feces hits the proverbial fan.

We'll see how much of this turns out to be true.

In the meantime I'm wondering how many lips will loosen once they realize that Sarah no longer holds a position of power and the ability to do them or their families harm.

And I'm also wondering how long it will take to undo / turn around / the policies that her appointees have in place - like making it illegal for Alaska natives to fish for their survival this winter, for example.

By Popular Demand...

Well, thank you to one of my readers for asking for more video.  Same as the last, this video displays clips from the Faux Noise production about Sarah Palin when she was a candidate for vice-president.  They got lots of footage from Elan Frank, who had shot video over 2-3 days encompassing April 8, 2008.  The reason this footage is so incredibly valuable (and likely the reason Faux has pulled its video of this very time frame) is because Sarah supposedly gives birth to Trig just 10 days later.

Clips here are taken from Part Two of the Faux Noise production (credit: Elan Frank) that I captured and converted.  There may be more coming, I still have to scour parts 3 - 5 of that "commercial for Sarah" that Greta Van Susteren narrated.  Take it for what you will, at least this time I figured out how to add some sound!

Looks Like Campaign 2012 Has Started

Credit for the original image below goes to Runner's World online mag, who staged this cutesy pic of Governor Icon last month. I'll take full blame for the overlaid word salad but I swear I heard her say something very much like this in the past!

By the way, don't you just want to do me? *wink wink*

I couldn't resist. *insert smiley face here*

Governor Icon of Tight Ab-Land

I found a comment from Regina of Palingates on another blog today with a link to a series of YouTube videos showing the Sarah Palin special that FauxNoise broadcast almost 10 months ago. Thank you Regina, I've been looking for this footage for a long time! A lot of the video that Faux incorporates in their special was purchased from Elan Frank, an Israeli Air Force reservist and documentary director who interviewed Sarah Palin when she would have been almost eight months pregnant. Frank went to Alaska and filmed Sarah over a few days, and the best information I can find has April 8, 2008 as one of those days. (If any reader has confirmation or more precise information please let me know.

So, why is this video footage so important? Because just ten days later—April 18, 2008—is Trig Paxson Van Palin's birthday. Or so we have been told. Images of Sarah seemingly pregnant with Trig are scarce, and they are interspersed in the February-April 2008 timeline with images of Sarah clearly not pregnant.

I extracted an frame of Sarah from one of the videos and put it side-by-side with an image of another woman who seems to really be eight months pregnant. In case you're confused, that's Sarah on the left and a woman advertising a little strap-thingie that connects bra to jeans on the right.

I viewed all 5 parts of the Faux special and found more interesting material that may make it into blog posts in coming days.

Because snippets of the video are quite telling, I put a little movie together showing Sarah talking about her "tight abs" and cooing and giggling and looking ever so innocent as she talks to Elan Frank. I know, I should probably add music in here somewhere, but I'm still very much a newbie when it comes to making videos:

More Fun With Photoshop

The hole that Meg Stapleton and Sarah Palin dig with their ridiculous outrage over petty and false things brought the following image to mind.  If they keep it up, even their faithful disciples are going to have a hard time taking them seriously!

Sarah and Meg accidentally flush themselves down the 'get off the stage' toilet

The Wasillabilly Grifters

Backstory for those not aware:

AK blogger Celtic Diva is trying to get copies of some AK executive branch e-mails and the Palin administration wants an arm and a leg for finding and copying them, so readers of her blog are contributing so that the fee can be paid. The request for e-mails has to do with the executive branch leaking private information to certain media outlets to smear someone who filed an ethics complaint against Sarah Palin.

Part of Celtic Diva's fundraising campaign has included a 'thermometer' type graphic illustrating the fundraising progress. Each day a new image with a new "percent raised" has been posted. One day's image showed Sarah Palin holding a baby Eddie Burke (a radio host who broadcast the leaked information).

Sarah's disciples at one of her more prominent worship sites have gotten into a humongous uproar about this thermometer image because Eddie Burke's face was 'shopped on top of the body of Trig Palin, Sarah's [grand]son. They began informing everyone they could think of about Celtic Diva's horribleness and word must have reached Sarah herself. We know this because her spokesperson Meg Stapleton distributed a statement today, likening the 'shopped image to desecrating a holy icon. I'm not kidding.

As a result, Politico and even CNN reported the extent of Sarah's latest outrage, which probably sent an awful lot of traffic to Celtic Diva's site. Congratulations Linda!! Based on most of the comments on those stories, another result is that Sarah's bulb has gotten even dimmer (if possible). They are fun to read if you have the time.

So I thought, hey, I can 'shop too! With that, let me introduce my latest (hilarious) creation, titled "The Wasillabilly Grifters and Their Enablers." :-)

Feel free to reproduce and use anywhere you want!

Fear, Hate and Loathing in Anchorage, Alaska

After listening to a few hundred people 'testify' before the Anchorage Assembly regarding an ordinance that would extend the current anti-discrimination law to include members of the LGBT community, I've got enough material to compile a typical statement made by the red-shirted xtians who stood up at the microphone. The following is not a transcript, it is simply my impression. The images on the side come from pictures posted on this blog entry at Mudflats.

"My name is Redd Shurt and I've lived in Alaska for a while. I'm here to let you Assembly people know that God loves everybody and I love everybody, really I do, and I don't hate anyone. All my brothers and sisters in Khrist feel exactly the same way! In fact I know a lot of homo-sekshuals and I have gay friends, a lot of 'em. But there's a natchural way to live and an unnatchural way and if you all pass this here ord'nance 64, we'll be forced to condone, support and promote the unnatchural way which is the same as sin because it says so, right here in the Bible: [insert favorite chapter and verse from the Old Testament here]. Alaska will turn into Sodom and Gomorrah and be destroyed. Gays will be recruiting other people and spreading disease and prancing around telling us decent, God-fearing folks what we can and can't do in our own city. So do the right thing and vote NO on 64.

"I don't judge anybody because that's up to God, but I love God and I don't approve of those gay people's sin! Can I get an amen? Think of the children when they go to school or church or daycare or... to the bathroom! What happens when they run into men dressed up like women in a public restroom and get scared and confused! Or what if their Sunday school teacher was a lesbian, trying to infect them with some of that queerness -- that would be turrible bad! I have a right to raise my children as I see fit, far away from sick, immoral deviants. Gay people should just stay in the closet where they belong, but this ord'nance makes it okay for them to come out and that makes me disgusted and angry. Remember, I vote and I'm watching you! In fact, let the people vote on 64, otherwise you are taking away my rights to have a voice in this matter and it's clear that people who feel like I do are in the majority and the majority should rule!

"What about my rights? If I don't want to hire somebody you can't make a law that sez I have to. If God doesn't like what I do then I get to answer to God, not to some law you make up. I won't be able to turn down a homo-sekshual with bad credit who wants to rent an apartment without getting sued! The lawyers will get rich but us Khristshuns will go broke and that is very bad for our city, our state and our country. Even the US Military kicks gay people out and everyone knows that there's no proof at all that you have to be gay because I shure haven't read anything scientific to prove it but right here on the Internet it says gays can be cured so that means it's a choice and behavior can be changed. But if you wanna be gay then suck it up and take what comes with that and don't be asking me to give you any special rights. Besides, I shouldn't have to pay because of a choice you make!"

Why Babygate Matters

There are some people who say they don't care whether or not Sarah Palin gave birth to a 5th child, a son named Trig Paxson Van Palin. I care, and here is why.

Sarah Palin seems to see herself as a national political figure. She's done nothing to discourage any talk about running for President in 2012 or 2016, and in fact, she seems to be eager to promote herself as someone worthy of consideration.

Palin's supporters push for her candidacy and promote the idea on numerous blogs and other Web sites. They support her potential run financially through SarahPAC. I get the feeling they are not all that numerous but they are very vocal. We have to wait until the PAC's first accounting comes out to see how the support translates into dollars.

Even though many voices I respect claim Sarah Palin stands no chance being selected as the Republican nominee, much less winning the Presidency, I'm not confident enough in our mainstream media or our voting machines to think that such a fluke is 100% impossible. Besides, there is always a 3rd party ticket possibility.

I think most reasonable people would acknowledge that Sarah Palin uses people, including her own children, to further her political aims. If she did not give birth to Trig, she is especially using those who are against legal abortions, or those who also have a Down syndrome child, by appealing to them in events across the country. If she did not give birth to Trig, she has been lying to them and everyone else for a long time.

A person who would perpetrate a deception like this would also attempt to deceive on other issues. These are not the morals or ethics I want to see in a President, or in a person who holds any political office for that matter.

Sarah Palin's resume, and her appeal to what are called the core voters in the GOP, rests almost entirely on these "facts:"

1. She is an attractive woman and a mother of five.
2. She chose to give birth to a baby with Down syndrome.
3. She is a Governor.
4. She is knowledgeable about the "energy" issue.
5. She has a "servant's heart."

Point one is in dispute (the mother of five part). Point two is very much in dispute. Point three is true, but her legacy as Governor is still being written and it is so far peppered with incidents that do not reflect well on Sarah Palin's ability to govern wisely and well. That point four is in dispute is apparent if you do even a little research on the topic. That leaves us with point five, but it's not up to me to judge that.

Babygate is about points one and two. I can say with great confidence that the woman shown below could not have given birth to a 6 lb 2 oz baby a few weeks after these pictures were taken:

Sarah Palin on March 14, 2008

Sarah Palin on March 27, 2008

Sarah Palin, first week of April 2008

Babygate researchers have turned up all kinds of additional evidence that increases my confidence. This information is being preserved online at Team Truther as well as several other places. It's not hard to find if you look!

The only evidence to the contrary remains:

1. Sarah said she was pregnant. ("So, it was really great, I was only pregnant a month.")
2. The mysterious Gusty photos taken on one afternoon that appear to show a pregnant Sarah.
3. An ambiguous printed statement released by the McCain campaign purporting to be from Sarah's family doctor.

As for #1—We heard Sarah claim that the Alaska Legislative Council report on Troopergate cleared her of any wrongdoing even when it plainly told us she was guilty of abusing her office as Governor. Sarah also said she turned down the funds for the "bridge to nowhere" but neglected to mention she kept them anyway. And she also let everyone believe she sold the governor's jet on E-Bay for a profit even though she sold it at a loss to a political contributor. Believe what Sarah says at your peril.

As for #2—We know that a woman can appear to be pregnant when she is not. There are many ways to pad oneself under clothing. For some reason, the Gusty images are no longer publicly available. Neither are any other images that show a pregnant Sarah Palin. There are quite a few images that show a not-pregnant Sarah Palin though!

As for #3—Sarah's family doctor has never spoken on the issue even though local news media gave her the opportunity a few times in an attempt to put Babygate to rest. No birth certificate or medical records have ever been released that would back up Sarah's claim of being pregnant with and giving birth to Trig. No hospital birth announcements were published for Trig Paxson Van Palin.

If the Babygate deception was revealed as truth, would Sarah's chances at a national political office be virtually eliminated? My Magic 8 ball says:

That's why Babygate matters to me, and I'd guess that's also why Sarah Palin's supporters are so savage and vicious when anyone brings it up.

[cross-posted at Team Truther]

What the Red Shirts Really Said

Last night's public testimony from the red-shirted ABT people (Anchorage Baptist Temple, the church led by Jerry Prevo) boils down to this:

The LGBT community is not okay because God said so, according to the Prevochristians™.  They are extremely agitated at the thought that the Anchorage Assembly might pass an ordinance saying that gays actually are okay in the eyes of the law.

The Prevochristians™ won't say this out loud, but they are afraid this might mean that they are not exclusively okay. According to Prevo, there is only one kind of okay.  People who believe as he does are it.  So people who don't believe as he does can't be okay, can they?

The red shirts claim that their rights will be taken away if sexual orientation is added as a protected class along with other identifiers like race, color, creed, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, and marital status.  The only "right" they would lose, it seems to me, is the right to discriminate against a lesbian or gay or transgender person—which seems just fine to me.  If they ever had that right in the first place it was because they assumed too much.

Pastor Prevo has developed a litany of reasons why gay people are not okay, and red shirt after red shirt stepped up to the microphone last night and read out the reasons.

1. Being gay is a choice, a lifestyle, a behavior.  (Even if this were true, going to ABT and believing what Prevo says is also a choice.) 
2. Since gayness can be cured it is okay to ostracize, ridicule, reject and otherwise discriminate against gays who don't seek treatment. (Sorry, being gay is not a physical or mental disease.)
   
3. God condemns homosexuality as a sin.  (Whose god?)
4. Gays have an agenda! (And Jerry Prevo does not?)
5. Gays try to convert you into being gay too!  (Ahem.  Who is trying to convert who?)
   

It is immensely sad and quite unsettling to me that in order to grow a church, certain religious leaders opt to create a box in which to keep their congregations.

It's very hard to see what is outside the box when you are inside it. The box protects you and shields you, but it also blinds you and breaks your connection to the rest of the world. I don't have a problem with people being in a box as long as they know they are in a box, and as long as they accept that being in that box isn't the only right way to live.

More to Come But First:

I've been watching the video feed of the public discussion on the Anchorage, AK ordinance that would add a class of protected persons to their anti-discrimination laws. The law in Anchorage already protects people no matter their race and gender, among other descriptors. The ordinance (#64) seeks to add protections for those who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (aka LGBT).

The proponents for the ordinance are presenting studies that discrimination against this group is real, and in their testimony they are bearing witness, through personal accounts, of the bigotry, hatred, and ostracizing they or close friends have experienced... in Anchorage.

The opponents of the ordinance are inspired to speak out, to fight against the ordinance, largely by a few pastors of Anchorage churches. Their testimony includes exhortations to God, statistics about the deviance and foulness and disease of gay folks (which seem to be largely unsupported), history lessons going back to the Old Testament, and pleas to the Assembly to refrain from usurping their own rights. Rights? Rights to label others? Rights to discriminate against others? Rights to engage with others only as long as those others recognize their sin and agree to be re-programmed so they are no longer gay?

The opponents are of one voice when they say that lesbians and gays have an illness that comes about from their personal choice. If only, they wail, these deviants, these sick people would accept their help to stop being "not okay" so they could rejoin the Christian™ community!

Frankly, I am appalled. Appalled by the overt hypocrisy in the Reverend Jerry Prevo (and other pastor's) crowd. (See Immoral Minority for a copy of what this right Reverend has sent to his "congregation." See Bent Alaska for a history of the struggle to codify protections for the LGBT community.) I am appalled that a sect... a religious sect really thinks it should be able to enforce its particular beliefs on an entire city. I am appalled that so many individuals, all wearing red shirts, can get up and publicly display their bigotry, their disdain for tolerance, their disgust of fellow human beings. The right Reverend, I think, will have an awful lot to answer for, should he make it to those "pearly gates."

Anyway, more to come on this. There is another open session tonight where additional "testimony" will be taken. Please visit Mudflats for information on how to listen/watch tonight's session. Also please visit Alaska Commons for a comprehensive view of the ordinance and its meaning.

Compare and Contrast

There are hundreds, if not thousands, of images of Sarah Palin. Most of this photographic record starts with her Alaska gubernatorial run and goes through the McCain-Palin campaign. I've displayed a random sampling of those images in the strip on the left.

I think many of us noticed the sudden and startling shift in Sarah's appearance in her recent cable news interviews. At first I put it down to a different hair-do—a subconscious, perhaps, rebellion against David Letterman's jest that she went to Bloomingdale's to "update her slutty flight attendant look."  After taking a second look, though, I think the contrast cannot be explained by just the hair style change.  Images grabbed from her Matt Lauer interview a few days ago make up the strip on the right.

In my previous post I suggested that something is definitely going on with Sarah, and I am even more sure of it after comparing these images. 

Before		After
These images were taken between the time Sarah Palin ran for Governor in 2006 and end when she finished her campaign to be VP.		These images were taken a few days ago as Sarah Palin spoke with cable news about her outrage over David Letterman's "knocked up" joke.

I wonder if the sea of pee'ers has noticed this physical deterioration in their goddess, and if they think their efforts to raise funds for SarahPAC will be of any help whatsoever. Maybe one of the teabaggers can talk her into sipping a good herbal blend that stimulates the appetite.

I'm No Doctor But...

Sarah Palin doesn't look well to me.

My impression comes from looking at the images of her "pageant walk" across the stage at the NRCC/NRSC dinner last week.

Awfully slim, skinny even, more so than I've ever noticed.

No hips, no abdomen.

Toes slipping off the front of the platform shoes.

Prominent tendons at the neck.

The hair is big, but nothing else is.

Here's another .. she's sort of leaning toward Todd as she makes her way across the stage.  Her chinbone is visible and her hands look absolutely skeletal.  Her kneecaps are obvious. 




I enlarged the hands to look at them better.

 

Her knuckles look swollen and her wrists and fingers are terribly bony.  The bracelet on her left wrist looks like it could fall off at any moment.  She's not wearing any rings that I can see, which is odd because she usually wears a wedding band.


Maybe it's just the lights, or the fact that black is incredibly 'slimming' in these photos.  But my impression is that something is going on.  What do you think?

How's Your Self-Esteem Lately, Bristol?

In each of Sarah Palin's public discharges (I can't help but think of the ooze from a pus-filled wound) over the last day or two, she takes the opportunity to ream David Letterman for destroying the self-esteem of young women everywhere. It is with no small amount of head-shaking that I feel it necessary to remind "she who is a media whore from babble on" that she herself is the major factor in destroying her daughters' sense of self-worth.

Think back to the beginning of September, 2008. The GILF (Governor I'd Love to F*** was a frequent descriptor) was chosen as John McCain's running mate. She came with some baggage. Part of the baggage was a legislative investigation into her questionable firing of Walt Monegan. We all know how that turned out—she was found to have abused her power as Governor by the AK State Legislature, but her own Personnel Board simply took her word for the fact that she had no idea members of her family and staff were harassing Monegan to fire her ex-brother-in-law.

The other part of her baggage was this persistent, long-standing rumor that she had faked her supposed 5th pregnancy and that her daughter, Bristol, had in fact, given birth to the DS baby Sarah lugged around on stage during the campaign. Sarah attempted (unsuccessfully) to squash that story by shoving Bristol, then not even 18, onto the public stage by proclaiming that Bristol was now pregnant by "around 5 months." Instead of offering any records that she, Sarah, had given birth to Trig, she outed her 17-yr-old daughter's current pregnancy as a way of saying, "See, she's really pregnant now, so she couldn't have been pregnant before!"

Talk about embarrassing. Bristol was padded and stuffed into tight clothes and displayed on stage at the RNC and carted around throughout the campaign, curiously acting more motherly toward Trig than Sarah ever did. From that time on I felt sorry for Bristol. Her pre-marital sex with someone suddenly became common knowledge across the world. Had my mother done that to me (had I been unfortunate enough to become pregnant as an unwed teen) I would have despised her.

And that wasn't enough! Almost as if Sarah wanted Bristol to pay dearly for her indiscretions, Bristol somehow became a spokesperson for abstinence via Candies' "excuse me" subsidiary. Candies makes money by selling sex to very young girls. They also try to counter the negative publicity from this by running another enterprise that is intended to tell young girls that they should not engage in sexual intercourse -- all the while feeding them images that aim to get them to buy and dress in sexy revealing clothing.

So I ask, what has Sarah Palin done in her own small sphere—her family—to bolster her own daughters' self-esteem? She branded Bristol as an irresponsible youth for whom an equivalency high school diploma is some grand achievement and an out-of-wedlock child is a happy misfortune. Her brazen tossing of Bristol under the bus of her own political aspirations must have sent red flags to Willow, and even if Piper doesn't realize it yet, she too has been demeaned.

For Sarah to essentially call David Letterman a pedophile and a statutory rapist is not an ordinary reaction. It is an extreme over-reaction. It makes me wonder about the rape history in Sarah's family story. You only get that touchy about something that has touched you.

Here's another aspect of Sarah's hypocrisy in her recent blathering. She said in the Matt Lauer video,

Quite, I think, a sad commentary on where we are as a culture, as a society to chuckle and laugh through comments such as he had made the other night. I think it’s quite unfortunate.

But listen here to an audio broadcast where Sarah giggles when radio talk show hosts demean an Alaskan Republican legislator who happened to be recovering from cancer. The shock jocks call Lyda Green a bitch and a cancer. Way to go supporting women, Sarah! You agreed and laughed and never said one word to tamp down the very nasty speech against a fellow female politician IN YOUR OWN PARTY.

Sarah, take it from me. I'm a financial conservative and social liberal. I have three children, one of whom is a daughter. My mother was a dittohead (aka Rush Limbaugh devotee). If you had shown any promise whatsoever, even in one sphere (besides American Talibanism), I would have tried to find reasons to support you. Instead, you spit on me and those like me, because even though we are working women who have raised children while totally supporting our households in ordinary jobs (at less than 1/3 of what you make), you say we do not belong to "real America," whatever that is. What you are doing now, by smacking your lips and getting all in a roar about a late night comedian, is self-defeating. You have chosen to fight a paper dragon. Yet you are no warrior, you are a whiner. You are no lady, you are a tramp. You are no Christian, either, so get off it.

The jokes that Letterman told a couple nights ago were derived from you, the actions you took, the scrutiny you invited, the celebrity you sought and cultivated for you and your vulnerable children. Your daughters' self-esteem problems, whatever they may be, have nothing to do with Letterman compared to what you've already done to them.

Red Is the Color of ...

Given today's terribly sad news about an aged right-wing, white supremicist shooting and killing a security guard at the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC, and given the recent horrific news about another right-wing anti-abortion extremist killing Dr. Tiller at his church last weekend, and given the awful speech by extreme right-wing idealogues who mouthed off against Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, I suppose I should be thankful that none of the LGBT citizens who appeared at last night's Anchorage hearing were harmed while I watched.

Staying up well past my bedtime last night I viewed as much of the hearing as I could (via the Internet) on Anchorage, Alaska's proposed ordinance to add LGBT persons to their anti-discrimination law.  Was anyone else disturbed by the nearly uniform wearing of red shirts by all those who testified in opposition to the ordinance?  Had I been sitting on the board hearing the testimony, I would have been upset that a simple session for citizen comments would be usurped by what appeared to be a calculated, organized movement.  People from well outside Anchorage spoke against the ordinance... no doubt people from Sarah Palin's own home congregation.

I wrote down several themes, from both proponents and opponents.  What I finally sorted out for myself today boils down to this:  those who oppose making explicit a LGBT person's rights are afraid.  Here is what they have been led to fear:

• They will no longer be able to freely discriminate against members of the LGBT community.
• In addition, they will no longer be able to assert their dominance as the major religion, forcing their ideas and beliefs on others.

I consider myself to be a spiritual person, but not a religious person.  If I were gay and marching in a parade, I would not want so-called Christians yelling at me, reviling me, telling me that Jesus could save me from my illness, and insisting that I am damned if I don't listen to them.  Yet I would never chastise them for holding those beliefs.

I do not care what my neighbors believe when it comes to religious precepts.  What I would care about is if my neighbors took it upon themselves to set me straight according to their religious beliefs by haranguing and harassing me.  (I do wish Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons would stop knocking on my door, trying to enlist me in their belief systems.)

Our country does have freedom of religion.  It also has, or should have, freedom from religion.  Extreme fundamentalists and proselytizers have the option to kick out their gay son or daughter from their own house.  They have the option to refuse entry to a transgender person from their house of worship.  They have every right to turn away a gay couple who asks to be married in their church.  But each of us also has the right to be respected when we ask evangelists of whatever flavor to leave our front porches or get out of our faces at women's health clinics or on the streets.  Each of us should have the right to be hired and perform our jobs with excellence regardless of our religious or personal beliefs, regardless of our gender or sexual orientation, and regardless of our race.  Each of us should have the right to rent an apartment as long as we have the finances to do so and no history of trashing places.

There were a couple very egregious things I heard from the "red shirt" crowd last night.  One was that 'teh gay' was a behavior, a choice, and therefore was not worthy of an extension of civil rights.  To that I say, your choice of religious beliefs is also a choice.  Why should one segment of society be told to change their "choices" while your choices remain unassailed?  What makes your "choices" any better than anyone else's?  (Let it be known that I do not subscribe to the view that 'teh gay' is a matter of choice.)  The other was that laws should not be made to grant benefits to minorities when the majority was against it.  When it comes to civil rights, it is our responsibility to make sure that minorities are protected from majorities. That is what civil rights is all about!  One speaker even revealed his fear that by affirming the civil rights of LGBT persons the ordinance would essentially be enforcing a religion of tolerance on all.  How fallacious.

If you run a business, you are no longer an individual.  You report to the state, the state licenses you to run the business, you have to follow business rules.  That goes whether you are silk-screening T-shirts in a garage somewhere or renting apartments that you own.  As an individual, if you do not want to invite a lesbian to your backyard barbeque, fine.  As a business who places advertisements for workers, you need to hire based on qualifications and not your own personal againstments.

I am not a "Christian," but I honestly don't think Jesus would mind hanging out with LGBT folks at all.  And I hope that the body in Anchorage responsible for deciding on this ordinance keeps in mind that the state is supposed to keep itself separate from the church.

Red is the color of passion, war, power, wanting attention...

"Better dead than red"
"Red herring"
"Was my face red"
"Redcoats"
"The devil wears red"
"STOP"
"Anger"
"Lust"
"Intensity"
"Danger"

Over the Top: C4P Can't Handle the Truth

It's not often that someone opposed to my personal views on political topics adds a comment here at Hypocrites and Heffalump Traps. But when someone has, that comment remained in the thread as part of the discussion. I have yet to remove a comment, much less ban someone from posting altogether. Maybe I'm just lucky not to have incited serious hate speech or excessive foulness.

I admit that I can be aggressive in a gentle sort of way. I was in that sort of mood when I posted a few comments on C4P's site last night under a topic that was excusing Sarah from "lifting" thoughts and words from the Gingrich-Shirley article without attribution. I wondered aloud if there was anything her highness could do or say that would raise an eyebrow of concern among her disciples. And I further wondered if anyone at C4P had a problem with Michael Reagan, and Sarah's glowing praise and encouragement of him when she introduced him.

The first poster to reply to me said, " Go away DivaPiglit."

Another wrote, "Tell your masters they need to come up with a better boogey man then Michael Reagan ok."

A third chimed in, "In case you haven't noticed, this isn't 'Converatives4MichaelReagan'. Who cares what he said or didn't say? And why the hell do you care if anyone here agrees with him or not?"

Then R.A. Mansour joined the fray, "She cited her source. How can she have plagiarized when she vited [sic] her source?"

The next thing I know, I read this from RAM, "Bye troofers. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out." Every post I'd made on the thread so far was removed.

So I wrote an e-mail asking what happened and why. Full content below, in chronological order:

Ejected from C4P...

Sunday, June 7, 2009 11:20 PM
From: "Lee Franklin"
To: ramansour@conservatives4palin.com

On what grounds, please?

I did not, to my knowledge, break any rules about posting.

Thank you for a prompt response,

Lee Franklin
aka Ennealogic

Re: Ejected from C4P...

Sunday, June 7, 2009 11:26 PM
From: "R. A. Mansour"
To: "Lee Franklin"

Off topic, spamming the thread, and being an over all jerk who annoys all of us. How's that?

I didn't actually ban you. This thread was your warning. Do it again and you're gone for good.

Re: Ejected from C4P...

Sunday, June 7, 2009 11:38 PM
From: "Lee Franklin"
To: "R. A. Mansour"

The topic was Goeffrey's article about Sarah's plagiarism. I do not believe I was off topic.

I opened some remarks and then responded to replies directly made to me. I do not understand how that qualifies as spamming.

As for being an "over all jerk who annoys all of [you]", perhaps that is how you see it, but I did not impugn any poster or the site. I did not malign you or anyone else there, I only asked a few questions about plagiarism and the speech that Sarah gave -- which was, in all 17 minutes, supposed to be a glowing introduction to Michael Reagan.

As for me, I did not receive even one honest answer to any of my questions from any of the people who spoke with me. Yet I am not annoyed, I am only saddened. Why does what I said annoy you?

As for your warning... I do not know what not to do again. Perhaps if you'd lay out the rules? Can one not question Sarah Palin's actions? Can one not point out that Mike Reagan wants to stuff hand grenades into babies' butts? Can one not link Sarah Palin with those she introduces and cheers on?

Thank you for a response, though. I wasn't expecting it.

Sincerely,

Lee Franklin

Re: Ejected from C4P...

Monday, June 8, 2009 11:56 PM

From: "R. A. Mansour"
To: "Lee Franklin"

You know what "saddens" me? Your Trig Trutherism.

Re: Ejected from C4P...

Sunday, June 7, 2009 12:08 AM
From: "Lee Franklin"

To: "R. A. Mansour"

I do not believe I have posted anything about Trig (Palin, right?) on the C4P site, ever. Have you removed my posts from a thread about Sarah's alleged plagiarism because you suspect I may not subscribe to your beliefs concerning the birth of Trig?

Seriously?

Re: Ejected from C4P...

Monday, June 8, 2009 1:16 AM

From: "R. A. Mansour"
To: "Lee Franklin"

"Trig (Palin, right?)"

That's it. Now you are banned for life, you sick son of a bitch.

"may not subscribe" to my beliefs?

Yes, I would also delete and ban racists, Obama birth certificate truthers, and Holocaust deniers.

You are at home with those people.

Don't ever come back to my blog. Don't email me again. Your emails are going in my SPAM filter.

For some reason I don't fully understand, the topic of Trig Palin's parentage is as horrific as garlic soaked in holy water and wrapped around silver stakes would be to a vampire. RAM and most everyone else at C4P seem to be deathly afraid of touching the topic at all. And I didn't even bring it up.

I pointed out the apparent disconnect between how they viewed Sarah Palin's cheerleading for Michael Reagan, and Obama's non-connection to Bill Ayers' revolutionary actions. Go figure.

Gosh, now that I'm branded as a sick son of a bitch, maybe I should get a tattoo?

Palin bin Plagiarizin

Geoffrey Dunn noticed something odd about Sarah Palin's speech last Wednesday, the one where she gushed over Michael Reagan and told him to continue to be bold.  In the linked story Dunn cites eleven instances where Sarah's words, even though they were garbled and chopped and then strung back together in her inimitable fashion, clearly originated from an article written by Newt Gingrich and Craig Shirley some four years ago.

"Screw political correctness," pronounced Sarah.  Indeed.  That must mean, also, too, screw honesty and screw ethics and screw the effort it takes to think your own thoughts and write your own speeches. 

By the way, I'm pretty sure it was Rush Limbaugh (may the universe forgive him) who started the whole "screw being PC" movement at least twenty years ago. Does Sarah have an original thought in her head, I wonder?

I also wonder how the Sarasites feel about their idol's words today, knowing that she ripped them off. C4P had reprinted much of Palin's Reagan-introduction-in-Anchorage and praised it in glowing terms.  I won't hold my breath waiting for them to berate the guv'ner for cheating and stealing.

A Tale of Two Speeches

Before I begin, I wish to credit AK Muckraker's post at Mudflats in which she transcribes Sarah Palin's recent speech introducing Michael Reagan. If you are unfamiliar with the fullness of Sarah's word salad, you really ought to read the whole thing.

And the quotes from President Obama's recent speech to the world given in Cairo, Egypt, are taken from the transcription provided at Huffington Post.

On one side of the world, Sarah Palin cheers on Michael Reagan. He is the son of a former President and a vehement proponent of killing mothers and babies who believe in Islam by stuffing a hand grenade up their butts... This is who Sarah Palin -- supposedly an avid "pro-life" person -- applauds and cheers on:

On the other side of the world, we see our President making the case for a new beginning in the hope that we can identify those principles we share instead of harping on those notions that separate us. See Obama's video in my last post.

Let's compare the speeches. I would not embarrass Sarah Palin so, except for this: she has given no assurance that she rejects the notion of running for a national political office in the future, and the Sarasites who adore her seem to truly believe she is well-suited for a national political office. On, then, to the comparison.

Opening paragraphs -- Sarah's will be in red, Obama's in blue. Keep your favorite grammar book handy:

We have an awesome guest, a guest who is affecting our culture in such a positive way. We need him to keep on being bold and we’re counting on Michael Reagan to help educate America.

I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt's advancement. Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: assalaamu alaykum.

Fair enough... Sarah is introducing an extremist right wing talk show host before an audience of maybe 400, and President Obama is speaking to the Arab peoples and the rest of the world before an audience of millions.

Let's get more into the meat of these speeches. Please read carefully and apply headache remedy as needed for the red text:

Today the things that some in Washington would do to take away our freedoms, it’s absolutely astounding, and we would do so well to look back on those Reagan years as he championed the cause for freedom and then he lived it out as our president - cheerfully, persistently and unapologetically. Reagan knew that real change and real change requiring shaking things up and maybe takin’ off the entrenched interest thwarting the will of the people with their ignoring of our concerns about future peril caused by selfish short-sighted advocacy for growing government and digging more debt, and taking away individual and state’s rights and hampering opportunity to responsibly develop our resources, and coddling those who would seek to harm America and her allies.

I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles - principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.

And again, more contrast:

What Newt had written in this article, he wrote “remember how refreshing it was with his outrageous directness that Americans loved, and praised and deserved” that Reagan dealt with, with then the troublesome Soviet Union, remember this? His vision for the Cold War? We win, they lose.

For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers - for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel's founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.

And this closing message:

Friends, we need to be aware of the creation of a fearful population, and of fearful lawmakers being led to believe that big government is the answer to bail out the private sector because then goverment gets to get in there and control it and, mark my words, this is going to happen next I fear, bail out next debt-ridden states, then government gets to get in there and control the people, and watch what happens there. Michael, maybe you want to talk about your home state California. We’ll see what happens there but you know it’s…. aaaaa!…. for the love of God you’ve got to ask yourself where we got off track?

It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion - that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples - a belief that isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It's a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today.

Sarah can't hold a candle to Barack. Not in style, certainly not in substance, and definitely not in spirit. Sarah is all about blaming and dividing. We recognize this personality because we learned it well during GWBush's years in office. Sarah is all about fear and loathing and calling on us to buy guns and ammo and build fallout shelters. She's all about that because she has no inkling of any other way but the isolationist, us versus them way. She is afraid. She cannot deal with anything outside her own small sphere because she doesn't have the wisdom or the education to realize that all human beings have common aims and dreams and hopes. She doesn't know that we need each other. Sarah asks us to be afraid along with her.

Barack asks us to step outside any fear and see truth.

Sarah couldn't put a cohesive speech together by herself if her life depended on it.

Barack not only can think and write and speak cohesively, he does so with a humility and graciousness that Sarah has never touched and probably will never know.

One speech makes us shudder and cower and clutch that which we feel is most dear. The other speech lifts our spirits and opens our hearts and encourages us to extend our hands in greeting and good wishes to our neighbors.

Two speeches, two entirely different attitudes. Which will have the more positive impact on our lives and our future?

A Time for Peace: Obama's Hope

I can't imagine anyone else currently in public life, or any other politician or person now in office, who could have created and delivered this speech with such depth, sincerity, gravity, and warmth.  I'm looking at you, Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich or any other presidential wannabe -- left or right.

I'm in tears.  The speech is long but as people who live for only a brief time as citizens of this world, we owe it to ourselves and our fellow humans to listen to it.  This is our President, and I could not be more proud.

Huffington Post has a full transcript below the video if you'd like to read along.