Politicalgates Weekly Roundup, February 14-20, 2011

By Blueberry Tart

HUGE THANKS to Bandit Basheert for sending pizzas on behalf of PoliticalGates to the protesters in Wisconsin!

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Valentines Day Protests in Iran

photo: abcnews.go.com

Kathleen continues to follow events as they unfold in the Middle East. This post covers the protests in Iran, rekindled after the successful removal of dictators in Tunisia and Egypt. Predictably, Sarah Palin inserted herself in this turmoil through Twitter, questioning whether President Obama would pressure Iran as he had done in Egypt. To her fans, this tweet was another example of her brilliant foreign policy credentials and her influence on President Obama’s handling of foreign affairs, with nary a thought to the many differences between the U.S. role in Egypt and Iran. As Kathleen observes, Sarah Palin “…is no more interested in the will of the people of Iran than she was interested in the will of the people of Egypt.”

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Saudi Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal and The News Corp.

photo: newsone.com

Nomadic Joe’s excellent guest post introduces Saudi Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal, one of the world’s wealthiest men. Among his many lucrative investments is one that is not widely publicized: a 7% share in The News Corporation, Rupert Murdoch’s enterprise that owns Fox News and The Wall Street Journal, among other media outlets. As Nomadic Joe writes, “Al-Waleed’s ownership might come as a surprise to many of [Fox News’] conservative ultra-patriot viewers.” To what extent does Prince Al-Waleed influence the coverage of news? He himself said that he got Fox News to change a banner covering unrest in France last month from “Muslim riots” to “civil riots.” Two top investigative reporters who had broken major stories about Saudi funding of terrorism for the WSJ left, after Murdoch scaled back terrorism coverage. To be continued.

Doubts Increase about Anthrax Case Conclusions

photo: newser.com

Ennealogic’s post presents new evidence that the case against Dr. Bruce Ivins was flawed. Ivins was accused of having mailed envelopes with anthrax, causing deaths, illnesses and panic. The National Academy of Science now disputes the FBI’s claim that the anthrax strain must have come from Ivins’ lab. The post points out other discrepancies in the investigation, casting further doubt on the FBI’s conclusions, investigative methods and integrity. Unfortunately, Dr. Ivins will never have his day in court, and the records of the investigation are sealed.

Thursday, February 17, 2011

“Death Panelgate”

from: laprogressive.com

Joe Christmas, cheeriogirl and sleuth1 are health care professionals, and they teamed up for an excellent guest post about the real damage done by Sarah Palin’s inflammatory and dishonest claim about “death panels.” As they so aptly say, her blatant lie was “rhetorical terrorism” which denied people the opportunity to have a dignified discussion and make a personal choice about their last days. Our guest-posters also show how well they know Palin, by perfectly describing the typical pattern when she is publicly called out: “Stonewalling, denying, rationalizing, reverse-victimization, Fox News cover, and eventually making light.” Sleuth offers a moving first-hand account of the turmoil that accompanied one woman’s death when her Do Not Resuscitate order was unavailable; the scene was so disruptive that her 10-year old son was denied the peace and quiet he needed to say goodbye to his mom in the way he wanted and needed to do.

Friday, February 18, 2011

Sarah on Long Island, PLUS Frank Bailey’s Book Leaked!

photo: msnbc.msn.com

Kathleen’s post began with a report on Sarah’s appearance at an event on Long Island at which she teased about the perfect credentials for a presidential candidate. Surprise – she fits the bill perfectly! And who would think anything else but “Presidential” when they gaze upon her wearing the short, tight skirt and leopard-spot shoes? But lo, just when we were getting into some of the juiciest snark about the shoes, all hell broke loose with the release of passages from Frank Bailey’s book on Sarah. Finally, one of Palin’s closest insiders tells what he knows about her true character. From the first excerpts, he seems revolted by and apologetic for his role in her politics of personal destruction, which, he claims, went against his personal beliefs. Among other things, he reveals Sarah’s campaign’s illegal coordination with the Republican Governors’ Association, her “dysfunctional psyche” and the inside story about Palin’s vendetta against Mike Wooten that became Troopergate. He also talks about her MO in attacking her opponents: “We set our sights and went after opponents in coordinated attacks, utilizing what we called ‘Fox News surrogates’, friendly blogs, ghost-written op eds, media opinion polls (that we often rigged), letters to editors, and carefully edited speeches,” Bailey wrote. Story is going viral as I write this. The updated post has tremendous links to background information.

Saturday, February 19, 2011

Blind Allegiance and Babygate

photo from thenewstribune.com

Patrick’s post takes a look at part of the Bailey book pertaining to “Babygate,” exploring the subtle meanings contained in several never-before-revealed emails from Sarah Palin and her staff. While Bailey disclaims Babygate himself (although admitting he was unaware she was pregnant before she announced it), these emails make clear that there were rumors that Bristol was pregnant and Sarah was covering up for her, even before Trig Palin’s birth was announced. After Palin announced her pregnancy, she and her staff still focused on whether the media “suspected anything.” Hmmm, interesting word choice, what would they suspect? Rather than disproving the rumors, Palin had her staff plant stories in the media to beat back the “suspicions.” She also suggested showing her stretch marks as proof of her supposedly then-current 7-8 month pregnancy. (Hmm. You couldn’t think of any other way to prove it, Sarah?) Despite the disinformation campaign, the rumors persisted in the days after Trig’s “presentation” on April 18^th. Palin and staff continued to try to beat them back, not with facts but with more snide comments about showing her stretch marks, again ridiculing the rumors instead of presenting evidence to refute the claim. Bailey himself recognized the “stretch marks” as a deflection from the truth – Sarah’s MO.

A Few Comments and Links:

Many PolitcalGaters expressed solidarity with TABJ, inmylife and our other readers in Wisconsin!

Linda1961: Sarah Palin has used her looks all her life; I wonder what she will do now that they are not just fading, but morphing into something far worse than Dorian Gray's portrait. She has nothing but her looks and her hatefulness, and the looks are gone.

Moles: Palin and truth are strangers, never to meet in this lifetime.

BadlandsAK took up lilylake’s challenge to finish the sentence: "At her New York interview, Sarah Palin's attire” … “was a hideous and unflattering monochromatic black leather ensemble, inappropriate to the occasion in question, yet strangely appropriate to the person on display, black being the color of her soul.”

465janedoeseeker: This article is a new first: it combines Sarah's sandals with Sarah's scandals. In neither department does she come out ahead. ;-)

JCos: I think Bailey must have misunderstood what Palin said. It was, "Hate IS my job!"

Event Horizon: Dedicated to the Long Island Lounge Lizard:

MoFo Ho Faux Leopard Shoosies
Made for escorts, teens and floozies.
Don't get drunk perched on these doozies.

Sparky40: Palin is starting to remind me of the telltale heart... She is suspicious because she is morally corrupt and dishonest that she knows Lyda Green (et al) have a reason or reasons to see right through her.

Patrick answered Molly_WI’s question: Is it not true that CBJ, when given the chance, neither confirmed nor denied that she was in attendance at the birth of Trig Palin? Yes, that's absolutely correct. That's what CBJ said when she had the "secret" interview with the Anchorage Daily News in late 2008, the interview that the ADN never reported about. CBJ appeared to the interview together with her lawyer.

Adrian found a great new moniker for SP on rumproast.com: America’s Back-Seat Driver™ (also “Millionaire Celebrity Anarchist” and “high-fashion media parasite”)

Everspring: What really smacks me in the face about Babygate is that NO WOMAN who has birthed 4 children already would think to conceal their fifth pregnancy. Totally not plausible!

Kevin: I have a feeling Palin is playing off the babygate story to make her opponents seem deranged, obviously boosting her with her palinbots, similar to how "birthers" are a turn off for independent voters who may vote Republican, but I don't think Palin is that smart politically...

Cackling Rad: ...babygate definitely works to Sarah's advantage with those who don't believe it because it seems so horrible to doubt that a woman's baby isn't her own (especially that "poor little DS baby"). It makes her look like a victim, as if people are just being mean to her, and because motherhood is considered sacred, it can be twisted to make it look as if people are attacking all women.

One has to wonder how she comes up with this stuff? The stretch marks angle is very, very effective in making people back off. In analysis it makes no sense, especially now that we know she was using it when she was still pregnant. But it serves its purpose of suggesting that anyone questioning her is being too nosy, too personal, too creepy. Clever. She does the same thing when she suggests that people are peering at her kids, or attacking her kids when they are really attacking her, or so many of the other ploys she uses. One could do a post on Sarah's Ploys. She is very clever in a sick, devious way. Years of experience, I guess.

Honestyingov pointed out this piece by Frank Schaeffer on “freedom from religion.”

TruGal found this link to a (longish) Salon article comparing Palin with John C. Frémont. While the comparison to Frémont is a bit strained at times, the article includes some very clever sideswipes (the author clearly knows many of Palin’s foibles) as well as thoughtful observations about Palin and quitting.

Juicyfruityy linked to this interesting comparison of how often Repubs lie vs. Dems. (Hint: here is a contest where Sarah actually does come in first, fair and square.) He also found this on a “Reagan litmus test.”

Aview999 linked to a great piece by Bill Moyers on Alternet.

BellPeppery highlighted the Guardian’s report admitting that WMD claim leading to Iraq war was false.

Juicy76 pointed out this report that Palin has split with Jason Recher, which seems all the more relevant in light of the Bailey book.

Nicky in NY posted this link on the connection between attorneys for Big Oil and the campaign to discredit Wikileaks. [BBT: seems like all things are connected…to Big Oil.]

Here is a link I found to an interesting NYT article on the strategy of non-violent action and 198 methods of non-violent protest and persuasion.

Older_Wiser linked to The Nation. (Happy Birthday, O_W!)

Special H/T to sunnyjane, who was on an incredible roll with the tweets this week!

The Last Word: Espresso4me: I long for the day when this dishonest, mean-spirited, ineducable, self-centered crazy person is exposed and revealed for who she really is for all to see. She is certainly appropriate for psychiatric services as well as jail and/or prison services. Just take her away!