Progs are spreading the ridiculous lie that Sarah Palin's youngest child -- the one with Down's syndrome -- is actually the offspring of Palin's oldest daughter, Bristol. Evidence? None. This is a smear, pure and simple -- and naturally, Daily Kos has provided one-stop shopping for all your smear-mongering needs.
Let's demonstrate how desperate the smear merchants have become. The comments on this Reddit page display the work of an armchair detective who found the MySpace page of a young Alaskan lad who declared his love for Bristol. We should not find this declaration surprising -- she's very pretty. But in the eyes of our armchair Sherlock...
So. We have what appears to be the father...That's an Olympian conclusion hop.
Then, of course, we get the note of false probity:
This entire issue is not about the baby but honesty and judgment of a woman who could become President...Sarah Palin's honesty is not to be assailed by a bunch of deception-addicted progs.
As readers know, I am careful to describe my politics as "liberal," not progressive. What's the difference?
ALL PROGRESSIVES LIE. ALL.
For the lowest of the low, consider this "progressive" comment, from someone who describes herself as a "journalist":
Down Syndrome, my ass.A commenter here suggests that Down's syndrome was a cover for the fact that Sarah took an Eskimo for a lover.
I prefer the more accurate term, “drunken teenage mother fetal alcohol syndrome.”
And back here, we have this gem -- from an Obama supporter:
Drag that 16 year old hussy out into the shining light of the moral majority.The Palin campaign was forced to disclose that Bristol is five months pregnant. Not long ago, liberals would be the first to argue that a teenaged pregnancy was the business of exactly no-one outside the families involved. Now we have the progressive HinesSight proudly displaying its Prussian blue nose:
PALIN'S FORNICATING, UNWED DAUGHTER IS PREGNANTSo next time you see Juno, just use this handy moral calculator: If Juno's parents are Democrats, then her pregnancy is not to be judged by the likes of you; her body is her business. If Juno's parents are Republicans, then she is a tramp, a whore, and deserving of public humiliation in the stockade.
(Actually, Juno comes from a mixed political family. J. Jonah Jameson is a Republican, but CJ once worked for a Democratic president.)
I've never seen such ugliness. I am that close to advising the PUMAs to vote not only for McCain but for every downticket Republican. The Democratic party does not deserve any power until the consummately emetic Markos Moulitsas and his crew of disgusting prog-monsters have been kicked out.
Andrew Sullivan: I think it is telling that Sullivan passes for a prog these days. Sullivan bought into the "Bristol's child" smear, and Larry Johnson retorted with a classic challenge to a mano-a-mano fight.
Sully, if you're scared of a guy with CIA training, consider placing your nose within punching range of yours truly. Even in my present state of chubbification (I never met a lasagna I didn't like), I think I can break your spine, if you have one. And my hell-hound Bella will devour your damned beagles.
17 comments:
I am disgusted at the vitriol being dispensed by people who I thought were on my side. Kos is the new Freeper.
I can't wait to vote McCain/Palin.
I'm glad we have people like you and the folks at No Quarter documenting this insanity. The Left has turned into that which they claimed to most despise--swift-boating smear merchants. After loudly (and rightly) criticizing the sexism of the primary for months, Taylor Marsh and her community of double-standard-loving freaks are claiming that it is all right to use sexist, below-the-belt tactics against Palin because she's a Republican. I am so proud to call myself a former Democrat.
A few months back I wrote to my Obama-supporting U.S. representative (Henry Waxman) and told him that I will not be voting for him in the future. Next I'll be writing to Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein to see if they have the balls to call the progs on these sexist smear tactics. Clearly the loss of my vote won't matter directly to these pols, but they'll know that if there's someone like me in the liberal bastion of West Hollywood who's appalled at this, then that means there are lots more like me in less liberal districts and states that do matter for the Dems.
So the progs seem to be up in it with Bristol/Juno, true enough. But imagine if Gary Hart had some hidden baby moma... don't tell us that Falwell wouldn't have had a Viagra-like woody for it. And what would Beverly LaHaye say, if Vanessa Kerry had a baby bump and no engagement ring? This would have been the Swift Semen story that couldn't be wiped off a blue GAP dress. Give 'em a little credit.
Not to mention I went to Kos after reading this. All I saw about Bristolgate was Markos hisself saying; "I don't think the evidence is there to claim Trig is Bristol's son, as some have speculated." After reading this post Joe, I was kinda expecting a blinking allcaps angry fruit salad with cruel pics and drool. Didn't get that at all.
And while I'm at it, I gotta say--- there is something interesting about a woman who flies to and from Texas back to Alaska once her water has broken (if that is true, as reported in the Anchorage newspaper). And something to the fact that she made her announcement of Trig's upcoming arrival while both 7 months preggers, and not showing one bit (according to her aides, who allegedly never scheduled any doctors appointments) it's not like the Anchorage News back-dated the stories of Trig's announcement where no one but Sara says it's so obvious she's with-child.
Is the "Black Stocking guy" (as Larry calls him) in this video really full of beans? NoQuarter says he has no proof of what he says, but you can see the Anchorage newspaper links... Black Stocking may be wrong on how long mono can last (5 months is still crazy-long, two is long) but Larry uses that as a straw man.
And it may only be 2 pics but Bristol certainly looks a) like the one who is brewing a puppy, [and ready to feed him/her] and b) definitely not someone with 5 months of mono. Larry also doesn't date the photo he uses as "proof" that everyone knew about baby Trig-- she announced she was preggers at 7 months and then had the baby at 8+/- months, that's at least a month to don a belly suit and do some interviews-- how about a pic from month 5 or 6 or 7? You're in LA joe, you know that anyone can get a belly suit, and you certainly know that people can see a baby bump pretty quickly when they want to (Angelina, Gwen Stefani, JLo...)
And in this pic, who looks like they just gave birth and who looks like they haven't had a kid in a few years?
And while we're at it, is it just me, of does anyone else find it really creepy that she announced Trig's Down Syndrome to friends and family in an email 'written' by "Trig's creator, your Heavenly Father"? Sure that's not proof that Bristol is now on baby #2, nor that Sara is hiding more than Norman Bates in her closet. But it's creepy that her email is signed by G-d (like that, the g-d thing?)
I don't care about her new baby-to-be. Nor that Bristol seemed to let the family know now, just at the right moment for mommy's career... But this other one is a real 800 lbs elephant
See-- i know its mudslinging. and it can backfire especially if you aren't really pro at slinging. But what has the "family values" bullshit been all about? How many closeted freaky-sex wierdos does the right have to have before one of them gets outed? How many times can they trounce on our rights in the name of unborn babies and Jesus H Christ while getting topped by Jeff Gannon, or doing more cocaine than Dave Crosby? Could nobody out Dennis Hastert? Could we not get Victor Ashe to tell us who's been in his arse??
I could care less about who does how and what goes where... unless its in secret, while in public they are taking away our rights, and using these 'travesties' to get elected. Maybe you gotta fight them with equal bile and acrimony? Turning the other cheek works as well now as it did for the guy on the cross....
(((and JC, FWIW, I too am not a progressive and never have been, subscribe to Alinsy's school of Radicals perhaps, and aside from cannonfire actually spend most of my political time as you know, dear Joe, in green business. Being as pragmatic as possible)))
Outstanding post! I'd like to personally make fucking dog meat out of Sullivan. He and Kds are two of the biggest asshats on the intertubes.
The fact is this "babygate" thing is FULL OF LIES, and there is PLENTY OF PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE showing Palin was very pregnant early this year.
For God's sake, give it up, people. Kos should be made to account for allowing somebody to post lies on his blog.
Remember, the "smoking gun" photo? It was taken in 2006. I have the REAL link to ADN. The poster at Kos photoshopped the caption and didn't put the 2006 date on it.
Palin had her baby. She went into labor in Texas. She's had four previous children. She knows the score. She wanted to go back to Alaska to be with her family?
Now give it, please, people.
hear hear! i am so ashamed to admit that i once used to read daily kos (before it bacame an oborg hpuse organ), and that i was a member of a political party that attacks 16 year old girls as a political tactic.
the pseudo-taliban one-sided moralists who infest the democratic party are turning the whole country against them.
i was opposed to a mccain presidency, but now see that the country simply cannot afford to have these fanatical, dishonest, cowardly, vicious woman-hating scum anywhere near power.
mccain-palin 08.
Of course it's no one's business if Bristol is preggers. But the bad manners of prog bloggers doesn't cloud the fact that Lady P is way to the right of McC on economic and enviro issues in a fragile state. She also appears to be a bit of a religious zealot who should not be anywhere near the seat of power.
The Obama supporters are not progressives, they're neo-progressives. This new breed of leftist is vicious, not liberal. They're disgusting scum.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2008/09/_as_i_tried_to.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Would You Do That to Your Daughter?
As I tried to make my way through St. Paul today – protesters managed to make driving, or even walking, anywhere pretty much impossible – people I ran into were asking one question: Is Sarah Palin doing what’s best for her daughter?
This isn’t a sexist question. It would also be asked of a male politician in her position. Is it fair for any parent to put his or her pregnant, unmarried, 17-year-old daughter through the klieg-light scrutiny of a presidential campaign? Actually, there’s a better way to put the question: Would you do that to your daughter?
There are lots of other issues involved with Bristol Palin’s pregnancy, chief among them her mother’s far-right views on sex education and abortion. But what’s truly awful is that the girl’s pregnancy would be reduced to “issues” at all. That unfair process became inevitable the moment Sarah Palin accepted John McCain’s invitation to be his running mate. Palin effectively guaranteed that Bristol would have her baby under the glare of unimaginable public scrutiny. The whole world would be watching.
It’s one thing to walk the walk of your political beliefs, as Palin did when she learned that her infant son would be born with Down syndrome. It’s another thing to bring your teenage daughter along for the hike – or even to allow her to follow you down such a path. As a parent, I hope Palin thought long and hard about Bristol before saying yes to McCain
Joe, I need to correct Susan, because she posted an outright lie.
Susan stated "Remember, the "smoking gun" photo? It was taken in 2006. I have the REAL link to ADN. The poster at Kos photoshopped the caption and didn't put the 2006 date on it."
This is a lie, and she needs to correct herself at her site as well.
Here is the link to the original ADN article posted online showing the photograph. There is no mention of the year 2006. This is the photo that ArcXIX linked to in his diary at Kos. He didn't photoshop a damn thing.
Here is the link to the newer photo that includes the additional information (date of 2006).
Please note that the first photo was posted online before the second one. This is proven by the numerical information that is part of the URL. The first photo is the genuine release, with no mention of 2006. The second photo appears to be a "reader-submitted" photo that becomes part of the Alaska Governor Sarah Palin gallery once submitted.
There's more. Take a good look at all the photos at the photo gallery that I just linked to up above. Starting at photo 1, we have the following submissions (I will abbreviate Anchorage Daily News as ADN so I type less):
1 - AP Photo/Heath Family
2 - AP Photo/Heath Family
3 - Photo by ADN/ADN
4 - Photo by UNKNOWN/ADN
5 - Photo by UNKNOWN/ADN
6 - Photo by UNKNOWN/ADN
7 - AP Photo/Heath Family
8 - AP Photo/Heath Family
9 - AP Photo/Heath Family
10- AP Photo/Heath Family
11- Photo by UNKNOWN/ADN
12- Photo by BOB HALLINEN/ADN
13- Photo by ERIK HILL/ADN
14- Photo by STEPHEN NOWERS/ADN
15- Photo by BILL ROTH/ADN
16- Photo by MARC LESTER/ADN
17- Photo by MARC LESTER/ADN
18- Photo by MARC LESTER/ADN
Let's just zero in on Marc Lester for now on...
21- Photo by MARC LESTER/ADN
23, 24, 25 - Photo by MARC LESTER/ADN
31 and 51 - Photo by MARC LESTER/ADN
NOW PAY ATTENTION
30 - Photo by LESTER/ADN
Some of these photos are clearly "reader submitted" as evidenced by photos 4-6 (UNKNOWN). And the photo in question - the one that adds the date 2006 to the photo, is the only photo that shows LESTER instead of MARC LESTER.
Joe, whether you like it or not, something is very odd about all of this. I dare say, it is as if someone submitted the second photo, adding the date 2006, but screwing up and forgetting to show Lester's first name.
And if I'm right, someone is engaging in damage control on a supposed non-story. And that's just downright "smokey."
John Dean
SluggoJD
Lee: You have probably made my point for me. However, putting aside the complete lack of moral compass shown by the new coalition for the last 16 months, putting aside that as Democrats, we just DON'T do this, putting aside that Sullivan, oblivious to the irony of being someone who once advertised for a particular kind of sex is now wringing his hands over teenage pregnancy, his catholic sensibilities assaulted on so many levels. Put all that aside and what you have now is a monumental tactical blunder.
Kicking the can of personal destruction on to Republican turf,
where they are masters of the game, serves them well, by distracting everyone from their policies.
They are rushing to defend Sarah Palin, unlike the cowardly Democrats who remained silent throughout the abuse of Hillary Clinton. Remember please, that for all his faults, John McCain was the only major figure to defend Clinton against the "Glen Close" attack from Steve Cohen.
So the vile attacks on a teenage girl and her mother do two things, cause the Republicans to rally around one of their own being attacked from the outside and turn out the vote which they need as their voter pool is smaller than ours, and harden the resolve of the disaffected Democratic base who were teetering between voting for McCain and taking the silent option by staying home.
Sullivan and Moulitsas are republicans, have always been republicans and this is how they play, but that writers and some liberals I used to admire, to be following suit, in yet another vile, misogynistic wank fest exposes the expedient lie that it wasn't all women they hated, it was just THAT woman! Pissing on 52% of the voting public once was stupid - doing it twice, is political suicide.
This reminds me of a line from Hunt for Red October
"This business will get out of control,and we'll be lucky to live through it."
This is UGLY politics. And I have to question these kinds of attacks. It really just smacks of insecurity of their own position.
Ms. Vandal.
Sarah took AN ESKIMO for a lover?
My, my, my! Why YES, she DID, actually--her HUSBAND, Todd, is part Eskimo! She's been banging an Eskimo (hopefully like a screen door, if life is good to her) ever since she hooked up with the fellow!
Gee, wonder if they rub noses!
I can't believe the absolute CRAP being bantered about in this election season.
Joseph, I am so disgusted with this New Democratic Party, whom I deem both neo-progressives, and Fauxgressives. They are making huge tactical errors that this campaign can't recover from. And if the Dems ever hope to win the general election again, they must get rid of this neoliberal leadership.
ex-Pat,
Don't you think that they are showing that they are misogynistic toward all women not just Hillary supporters (52%)? ALL women are deemed viable targets as long as it helps their agenda, to get their selected candidate elected POTUS:
Hillary, her supporters, any women who is anti-Obama, Planned Parenthood (for telling Obama how to vote on the IL BAIPA bill), and now Palin ... ALL are fair game!
And let's not forget Biden's treatment of Anita Hill during those hearings.
Whose next?
Sen Feinstein didn't even show up for the convention due to her, hmmm, broken ankle.
FembotsForObama
FembotsForObama: You are of course correct, but the 52% I referred to was all encompassing. 52% of the the population of this country are women. 52% of registered Democrats are women - so 52% is a rather a magic number.
Republicans Fornicate Democrats engage in "brief unions"
I'm writing this from Venezuela, where most people think Obama will win. I abuse them of the notion. In Trinidad (my last destination) they know, "America will never elect a black man president." I tell them they're right.
No matter what your reason, the only message an anti-Obama vote sends is that a black presidential candidate cannot win. If Obama loses, there will not be another black Democrat running in my-- and probably your-- lifetime.
For the Democrats... and most of the world... race isn't a question here. It's the ONLY question. --Mykel
Post a Comment