Trying To Get Past The RNC PR Spin Machine (and the slander) To Figure Out Who Sarah Palin Really Is

Anyone who is trying to figure out who Sarah Palin really is (like I am) since she could be our next freaking president should read the link below now. 

Letter from an informed (and concerned) citizen that is intimately familiar with Sarah Palin and her history.


  1. Augusto’s avatar

    Thanks for bringing that letter and the other Washington Independent article to our attention.

  2. GAB’s avatar

    WOW – double WOW – Now we can see whether we should or should not, in the future and after November (not now of course) underestimate the stupidity of
    the American public. Thanks for posting the links.

    I do not usually follow political blogs so it was informative to read the letter from someone who knows her. My initial reaction to the Palin selection was that the RePubes had made a clever move, but that is only because I am guilty of the cynical attitude of NEVER underestimating the stupidity of the American Public (I am a member, we all are).

    Maybe more than one fence-sitter will now see through the hype and make a more informed choice. But the Palin selection still worries me, it could swing the vote to the Pubes and prove the stupidity theory once again. Will the Press Pander? Will the Rational Rule? Wish I knew, thanks again – GAB

  3. Mike’s avatar

    Sounds like every other politician. You dont reach those heights without getting your hands dirty, no matter your affiliation.

  4. Andy’s avatar

    Palin bans books, is anti-choice and thinks that we should give up science in favor of creationism. And McCain is trying to distance himself from GW? And he’s climbing up in the polls. Methinks it’s time to consider moving to Canada again…

  5. 1979semifinalist’s avatar

    Augusto: No problem – and thanks for stopping by!

    GAB: Yeah, there is so much drama and gossip out there about “is Trigg her baby” and “Bristol pregnant again” and “Boy, isn’t Palin cute and oh so sassy!” that a lot of the real important information is getting missed. I thought the articles I linked to in this post and the last, especially the “Alaskan” articles really cut through all that crap and just listed the facts…the very scary facts.

    Mike: I don’t care so much about the fact that her hands are dirty, I just care about the facts. She is the LAST person on earth I want anywhere near the white house, chick or no.

    Andy: EXACTLY. I think those facts are getting wildly under reported, while all this baby drama and “sarah’s so sassy and what a good speaker!” crap gets all the media attention…since when does being “sassy” and a “good speaker” actually qualify you to be a heartbeat away from the presidency? But I come from that old school philosophy that I don’t want my president to be a “down to earth guy/girl that I can share a beer with and talk on the same level with” I’m okay in the brains department, but I want someone WAY smarter than me running the country…and the free world. I have a pretty good feeling I could give Palin a run for her money…and so there is yet ANOTHER reason that she should be out of contention in my mind.

    Also, how is Harvard and Harvard Law Review the same as Journalism Major from the University of Idaho? I know that education is not everything, but I’m surprised there is not more being made of this as well.

    The whole thing scares the beejesus out of me.

  6. diesel’s avatar

    “Palin bans books, is anti-choice and thinks that we should give up science in favor of creationism. Methinks it’s time to consider moving to Canada again…”

    Dude, read the freaking article. An excerpt:

    “pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to
    promote it.
    “Pro-life”: mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down’s syndrome baby
    BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life

    You’re calling her “anti-choice” because she chose not to abort her own child. Nice. You ARE the spin machine.

  7. 1979semifinalist’s avatar


    I moderated (read: deleted) your second comment because it was not constructive, but just rude, and that’s not the blog I’m running over here.

    I allowed the first comment to go through (though I disagree with you) because it is constructive (until the end).

    While the article I linked to in this post is (I think) pretty fair and balanced, the reality is that Palin IS pro-life – she’s on record as being pro-life and proud of it – there is no debate to this. The article I linked to merely acknowledges that she has not “called special legislation on the issue” – that doesn’t make someone any less pro-life, it just means that maybe they’re not (or haven’t yet had a chance) to attack this specific issue with guns blazing.

    As for the creationism – as I understand it she is for creationism and again, proud of it. It’s not like she’s hiding these beliefs, they are her beliefs.

    Supporting an issue means she’s for it. Just because she hasn’t gone after specific things related to it (yet) doesn’t mean she doesn’t believe it.

    Just because opportunities to quash or support legislation related to
    these issues haven’t presented themselves doesn’t mean they won’t in the future.

  8. malibufats’s avatar

    more on Palin at my weblog – http:/
    thanks for linking – malibufats

Comments are now closed.