Andrew
Sullivan has the cover story for the current Newsweek, titled "Why Are
Obama's Critics so Dumb?" Palin sent a tweet today saying: "Know what's truly 'dumb'? Giving a cover story to the Trig
Truther conspiracy kook writer who thinks I didn't give birth to my
son."
The Yahoo story on the
dustup links to Justin Eliot's ridiculous "Trutherism
Definitive Debunker" story,
which Patrick at Politicalgates destroyed last year.
My
question is this: Is Palin so in need of the spotlight that she will now use
references to the birth hoax to stay in the news? My guess is yes, that's
exactly what today's tweet was all about.
Of course,
by keeping Babygate alive, she's helping justify a book on the topic. But I
suspect she's looking forward to that too. She may have worked out in her
imagination her public defense of the the hoax so many times, she's looking
forward to when she's forced to use it.
What do you
all think?
As Ivyfree said, Palin's not normal.
ReplyDeleteMaybe she was so anxious to get back at Sully and to get herself back in the news, that she didn't think about how she might wake a sleeping dog. Or maybe she was (rightly?) counting on the media's continuing spiral of silence. I don't think she was inviting Fred to "bring it on," but--again--Palin's not normal.
She's going nutz that she can't "git in there with that fire in her belly" b/c of Babygate :)
ReplyDeleteRemember what she says the opposite is true.
I really hope she tries to get in somehow, only then will we learn the truth about Babygate :)
The fundie RW evangelical thing is to do the "I have sinned! I have sinned!" thingie next, after you get caught, as a seemingly last resort (like Tammy Faye's husband; Jimmy Swaggart; many others). I would guess when Palin gets pissed off enough with her enablers because they are ordering her around too much, she will out everyone herself. If the BabyHoax comes out, Don't you think she will pull as many others as possible down with her? Enablers: "If you step out of line, we will reveal the hoax." Palin: "If you do, I will reveal your role." Someone will pull the trigger eventually.
ReplyDeleteI say "seemingly last resort" because I've often thought that her next step will be a Tammy Faye kind of evangelist gig: use her charisma, collect lots of money, say outrageous things that get into the papers, have a hysterical, devoted following, do more with ever-bigger wigs. The fact that she does not seem to be a regular church goer (or perhaps even much of a believer) does not matter. It's the Repub hillbilly thing to do: "Ah have sinned! Aaaah have sinned! Let's pray together. And send money."
Having her eye on a next gig like this is consistent with her helping to keep the Trig Truther issue in the news. (Yes! anything to stay in the news!) During the election campaign, she never said she gave birth to Trig -- only that he was her son. After the election, she got bolder, as in her tweet above.
But who knows?
It's difficult to evaluate Sarah's reasons for anything because, as I've said before, she's not normal. I tend to think that, as stupidly reactive as she is (see: Tucson shooting), she's so infuriated by Sullivan's article that she's shooting off her mouth without considering how she sounds. That would fit with her pattern.
ReplyDeletePlus, I think it's possible that she has convinced herself that she did, in fact, give birth to Trig; I think she's that far gone, mentally.
I find it hilarious that she doesn't realize she labeled herself as "dumb" by responding the way she did. Yes, Sarah, we ARE laughing at you.
I suspect that in the future, somebody will speak out. I also suspect that Sarah will realize that a televangelical gig on Christian Broadcasting is probably her only viable career path. That way,yes, she can talk repentance and collect tax-free donations. And sell videos and recordings and books of sermons and childrearing advice books and little miniatures of the North Star Cathedral (located in beautiful downtown Wasilla). Oh, and build cheap motels for pilgrims to stay at when they come to view the Holy Blessed Child, Trig. The Blessed Angel of God- which she said they call him EVERY day. (They must phone him.)
WaPo has IT!
ReplyDeleteYeeHaw, Brad exercise yer writin' fingers! Another paper or book ASAP!
"It’s an old story, one that bears no relevance to today’s affairs and that no one really cares about anymore."
DeleteWe care, and apparently Sarah cares that we care.
Yessssss! Thx crystalwolflady! There are good comments there -- go over and vote them up.
ReplyDeleteMy guess is Sarah's snarl at Sullivan was visceral, rather than calculated. I was a bit dismayed by the degree of misinformation in the HuffPost article (which had no byline, I noted) - and then intrigued by the many comments on it - over 3200 as I type. Tammy Faye Palin? Maybe televangelism will be a viable income stream for her.
ReplyDeleteBrad- you apparently are writing a book since you have an ad in the ADN requesting documentation in exchange for money.
ReplyDeleteYou said you wouldn't write a book without a publisher so does that mean you have one? Best of luck.
Now that I've heard Sarah on Fox saying she would vote for Newt in SC to keep the race going, to "get the candidates vetted," so we won't have an unvetted Pres. like Obama, blah, blah, blah--I think she's been projecting and opening the door to questions about herself all along and I only notice on those few occasions when it is about Babygate.
ReplyDeleteI posted a comment on the previous thread that is also relevant here, so, if interested, see below please.
ReplyDeleteHi Brad,
ReplyDeletemany thanks for linking to my post. The ignorance of the MSM is still breathtaking. We made some progress in 2011, with websites like "Business Insider" taking us seriously, but these have been lonely voices. The overall progress in 2011 was smaller than I expected.
We still have to fight with everything we have. Regarding a book about babygate, I would say, just write it, and don't think about whether it will commercially by successful or not. Write it as a service to your country.
... Continuing the topic from your previous thread Brad, I think Patrick has good advice. The book absolutely needs to be written, because we can feel very certain that at this point, the Alaskan bloggers won't do it. IMO, they are obviously enabling someone behind the scenes who either wants to be "first" or has such a compromised background that finding a publisher/marketing method is impossible. More likely, a combination of the two. But, why? The only ideas I can come up with are payoffs and hunger for blogging status (i.e. 'clicks' and 'number of comments').
ReplyDeleteThe idea that the 'fear of the bots' is what's holding things up is ludicrous. Trig Truthers are stronger than that, and have been fearless in unearthing and discussing each and every minute fact of the case. The hoax has been unmasked a thousand different ways and times. Floyd Orr in his book "Paradigm Shift" has explained how such a creature as Sarah Palin could have even happened, and the Babygaters have hammered the details.
"Fred" surely exists, but the tease is just that: a tease. What happened to Me Again's treasure trove of details - are they buried in a certain Alaskan blogger's back yard? Why wasn't McGinniss's book promoted more by IM? Why did Dunn's book slide right past Babygate and why did Huff Po contributor Jeanne Devon and sidekick Shannon Moore smirk at Netroots at the very possiblily of a pregnancy hoax? Why, indeed. There must have been something in it for them, and that something is still a major factor to this day.
Flog me if you wish, but I've smelled a juicy rat for a long time, and think some others of you might have as well. I hope someday a "hairy eyeball" is cast in the direction of some of the revered bloggers; I'm of the opinion that they find no compelling reason to ever "end" Babygate. "For the good of our country" flew out the window years ago.
Write the book, Brad, and publish it yourself if you need to. The story has to be told.
- - - - - -
Note: I am Heidi3 (sock monkey avatar); I had to sign into Google as heidi1.
Hi Heidi3 -- Good points. If there IS a lack of urgency to reveal the hoax and thus end it, could it be for the same reason that MSM is blacked out about it? In my opinion, revealing the hoax would expose thing(s) that SP or her enablers have on everyone who would be in a position to reveal anything. To connect dots that are prob way too far apart, my thoughts turn to Murdoch's phone-tapping and email hacking: could there be a blackmail file on anyone who threatens to reveal the key details? Mere speculation on my part. But as Sam Spade said, "everybody's got something to hide." The Beatles said it too, so it must be true.
DeleteWhat's needed is a good book proposal, to convince a major publisher to take the book on. I'm guessing the "Fred" book was with a very small publisher, and sales would have mainly been to readers of IM. And then something happened to upset those plans; maybe Fred turned out to have his own problems.
ReplyDeleteLook, the topic is riveting. But it will take the right writer finding the right agent who will find the right publisher. Am I that writer? I don't know. I have a full-time job as a professor. If I were on sabbatical, I could do it. But I am four years away from being eligible for one.
Brad, I understand. That's the biggest problem: We all have jobs, and very little time. Yes, I think you would be the right writer! But yes, with a full-time job, it's almost impossible. Isn't there a possibility for you to go part-time for a limited amount of time? :-) I know that everything is very difficult. I am just a little bit depressed right now because the poisonous influence of Sarah Palin is still alive and kicking in politics. Many people don't like her, but even more people underestimate her.
DeleteBrad, Patrick is right.Find a way,it's really that important this gets out.
DeleteI am a big believer in not reinventing the wheel. Find Fred and offer to finish the project. If it was anywhere near publication in Sept., you should have plenty to work with. If he has given up, he has nothing to lose by turning it over to you. List him as co-author, split any proceeds 50/50. If nothing else, self-publish on Kindle and Create Space. I've helped someone do this before. It's very do-able.
ReplyDeletePatrick, Gryphen, Audrey, Bree, Floyd, Sully, whoever--if you know who Fred is, and if you are serious about getting the Babygate word out, please ask Fred to contact Brad.
Re "the right writer finding the right agent who will find the right publisher" -- it's hard for me to imagine a more "right" writer, agent, publisher, and PR/media effort than McG had. We can disagree on details, but a known author? a major publisher? and the way the press campaign started was more than one might expect. I think whatever happened there is at least as important as any drama on the bloggers' end. McGinnis must know or have a good idea of what happened, and why. But he has said not a word, to my knowledge. He just sank lie a rock in a still pond, with nary a ripple.
ReplyDeleteLet us remember, too, that before McG's book was published, in the early days of his blog, his response to why not go full throttle on babygate was something like "I might, but I don't want people to discount me at the outset as a tinfoil-hat-person, so I will be a Trignostic." If I remember correctly. It was in response to my (and others) hectoring him re why not just say it right out. I recall agreeing that this might be important to get reviewers' attention at the outset. But he did not succeed in capturing that attention, in spite of a good start, in spite of his caution.
Floyd Orr, alone, astutely pointed out that the Joy Behar/McGinniss interview (which Floyd has a CNN transcript of on his site) was shown and then pulled from the web, with only an abbreviated version (no teeth) remaining on YouTube.
Transcript (scroll down to the red part): http://niafs.blogspot.com/2011/09/rip-babygate.html
I agree with Floyd that this is a HUGE CLUE for us who think there is a blackout in the MSM. I am SOOOOOOOO eager to hear Joe McG's assessment of what happened.
I believe that there are a few reasons why babygate is like the "third rail" for the
ReplyDeleteMSM-Political Complex (like the Military-Industrial Complex).
We are all used to politicians taking bribes, having "off-shore accounts" or even engaging in a bit of hanky-panky with the voting machines. These type of revelations would be sort of "ho-hum" in our day and age. BUT, if the MSM announces that one of their own cash cows(Granny Grifter) is the complete fraud that we know she is because she faked her pregnancy, then they(MSM-Political Complex) might be slicing their own wrists.
Just look at the last few weeks of the GOP show called "primaries." It is one of the main attractions for TV viewing. SP and others like her are golden opportunities for freak-show like interest. If their utter bullshit is uncovered for all to see, that would be like Houdini telling his audience how he pulls off his greatest escape. Moreover, as we said many times, the truth about babygate would probably finally convince even some of SP's staunchest supporters of her lies. BUT it would also anger many of them.
This would cause these "low information types" to predictably blame the messenger-- because that is what they do.
I think the MSM-Political Complex is happy to milk SP (and her ilk) as long as they can.
If they allowed babygate to be revealed, it would be a huge gamble. It MIGHT generate more revenue, but it also might create a backlash. In these economically uncertain times, stasis is safe for some.
I still think that a decent book about babygate could sell, but it would have to be framed correctly and NOT RELY ON THE MAINSTREAM marketing networks. This would have to be a MAVERICK enterprise from the beginning. Remember how Obama got elected using new forms of communication -- well that is what would have to happen here. I think it IS POSSIBLE (like Amy1 who suggests starting with self publishing). Whoever is doing the book would have to keep thinking outside the box, over and over. Creativity and heavenly inspiration, bringing forth truth, not destroying... these would have to be the driving engines. And, yes, I believe it IS possible.
Amy1 - I think McGinniss did an excellent job and made a significant impact planting the right questions in the minds of many in the media. The ones who are open to the questions can't take them any further without new, irrefutable evidence or unless Palin attempts a run for office, providing opportunity to request documentation from her. Meanwhile, anything beyond a Trignostic approach will generate even more backlash. Consider the trashing Trignostic Andrew Sullivan received because Palin dropped the Trig Truther label on him.
ReplyDeleteConscious at Last - Excellent (but frustrating) analysis of the corporate media and "low information types".
ReplyDeleteTrashing for Andrew Sullivan? He was the most-visited blogger all along, and then he got the Newsweek gig. How was he hurt by his Babygate opinion? Doesn't more controversy = more hits = higher ad fees for Newsweek? Please correct me, anyone. Perhaps he got some pressure at his old employer and that was part of why he moved to Newsweek? I all along thought Tina Brown would do the BabyHoax story (like she did the earliest version of the Princess Diana woes as "The Mouse that Roared" cover story in VF), but so far I've been wrong.
ReplyDeleteWith a self-published book, at a v low price (laughably low for an e-version), do you think word-of-keyboard would get the message out? Perhaps all normal people really ARE tired of her? Why is more evidence needed? I guess some of you think the photos are not enough. Unlike me.
@Amy1. I'm afraid the normal people (like my family and friends)think she is history and what she did no longer matters. Babygate has to be framed as Sully and Brad have done, as an indictment of the GOP and the media and suppression of information voters need. But a journalist who will attack journalists is as hard to find as an attorney who will sue attorneys.
ReplyDeleteAs to Joy Behar, perhaps as a feminist she is uneasy with a female politician being attacked in a way a male wouldn't, such as about a pregnancy. She might think it is true but also think there are plenty of reasons not to vote for Palin that are unrelated to her female parts, so why go there, why not edit that out of the YouTube version. In other words it could be a very local, personal decision by Joy rather than a vast conspiracy.
B: One of Joy Behar's comments in the transcript is "There are a lot of things in here that are explosives [sic]." http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1109/21/joy.01.html
ReplyDeleteIn my view, the hoax is not so very related to her female parts: It's just lying, plain and simple. And, as we all point out from time to time, it's not even Palin lying that matters, it's the enablers and funders of that lie, and that it was in a presidential election. All the childbirth details and family issues, incl Trig's bioParentage, are huge distractions: yes they are part of the scheme, but a similar lie on another subject would similarly be an issue, if the lie was intended to bolster key fundie values as much as this one was.
I meant to suggest only that Joy might have had that part of the video removed because she did not want a focus on Palin's female parts. I didn't mean that was the main reason behind the media's spiral of silence. Her reference to parts of the interview as "explosive," however, suggests she was not the one who edited it.
DeleteI think Behar meant parts of his book were explosive, not the interview. Her show (that late-night interview show) was cancelled 6 weeks after that interview aired. She remained on "The View." In discussing the cancellation, she did not imply it was because of her McG interview. SHE didn't, but I can -- I mean just say HMMMMMMM about it.
DeleteSomething's not working right: I see a long comment from Floyd in my email alerts, but it's not showing up here. Don't feel paranoid, Floyd (like I usually do when mine disappear) -- it's happened before to each of us.
ReplyDeleteSame here, Amy1. It's a great comment from Floyd, and I hope it posts.
ReplyDelete~Heidi3
Actually, when I think about it, the Hoax is no more related to her female parts than it would be if a male politician had similarly hoaxed us by saying he had been pregnant -- because NEITHER of them would have been pregnant as stated. Lol.
ReplyDeleteI did not delete anyone's comment.
ReplyDeleteBrad, Over at Regina's blog, my comments sometimes went into her spam file for no reason we could figure out (except: software knows best!). Or maybe it was her moderation file (she did not moderate).
ReplyDeleteFloyd, again I see your comment in my email alerts but not here. I wish I knew how to help.
ReplyDeleteFloyd – I'll post your comment as an article, if you like. It shows up in my email as a comment. Do I have your permission to do that?
ReplyDeleteSure, Brad. There might be three versions that you can edit into one. The first time the comment disappeared, I thought maybe it was too long, so I cut it in half. Since the first half did not appear, I never sent the second half. Hours later, when I was looking at the material again, I thought of a few other things I wanted to include, so I cut out some of the book promotion and whining to keep it from being so long. You have my permission to edit it all into one version, if you want.
ReplyDelete