Profile
Search
Register
Log in
OK, I'm officially tired of Sarah Palin now
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Social stuff. Political stuff. KNOWMORE

Author Message
Self Conscious



Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 322
Location: Sleeping in a box car dreaming of lost starts
 Reply with quote  

icarus502 wrote:
Self Conscious wrote:
icarus502 wrote:
Dude. You didn't address anything that I wrote whatsoever.


i did answer, its none of the situations you described. Most of which had a obvious bias in how they were written (example: she made her way to Alaska either for reasons of Alaskan nationalism, because she considered that it would otherwise shore up her image as being a sort of supermom who is immune to pain, or because she simply would prefer that the unwanted child with sever defects die).


You didn't answer. It really, really seems that you actually have no idea what the content of the so-called "conspiracy theory" you're "debunking" even entails. Nor does it seem that you have any idea of what the Palin-given narrative for the birth even is. Why the fuck are you arguing this? I mean, if we call c&ping from articles that I've both read and addressed "arguing."

To wit:

How is what I posted, in the part that you quoted, "biased"? It's speculates on the reasons for which one would, while in a high-risk labor in a very high-risk pregnancy, one would put their unborn child in danger by hopping onto two transcontinental flights and thereby passing up several great hospitals in Dallas and Seattle, and flouting FAA policy and nearly every airline's policies (which generally state that a woman who boards an airplane in her third trimester should have a doctor's note and be fit-to-fly without the reasonable expectation of giving birth or they should be traveling in the company of a doctor) [it should be noted that Alaska Airlines doesn't restrict pregnant women at all and all airlines are on a sort of honor system regarding this, but they wouldn't board a woman who was visibly in labor]. I didn't make this up — if the reasons that I suggested seem biased or outlandish, it's because the situation itself is outlandish. For the record, one of my suggestions, that they did this out of reasons of Alaskan nationalism, is both the one that I think is most likely and the one that was proffered by Todd Palin himself: ""You can't have a fish picker from Texas." How is that biased? It acknowledges both what the (ostensible) father says AND the fact — which some "debunkers" think is super-relevant — that Palin was not a national figure at the time of the birth and was an isolated identity politician in a state in which secessionists are a sizable minority. Palin's personal ties to secessionists, including her husband, who was a member of the secessionist AIP from 1995-2002. If it sounds outlandish that one would put their already retarded child at such additional risk because they wanted, as localized Alaskan political figures (as well as demagogues and nativists, in general), to say their kid is a Real Alaskan then:
1) You harbor a willful disregard for the degree to which nativism has been the primary cultural political ideology of the American right-wing since, well, before America was even a country, through the Yellow Peril, both iterations of the KKK, the Minutemen Project (no D. Boon), and on and on. And, more importantly…
2) You agree with those of us who you're criticizing in that you think something is fishy about the Palins' own account of the birth. After all, that's the reason they gave.

The other suggestions, that she wanted it to be an essential chapter of her personal identity politics or that she simply wanted to be rid of the child, might be less charitable (I guess) than suggesting that she and her husband are simply bizarre Alaskan nativists who care more about those beliefs than the welfare of their unborn, retarded child, or it might not be (depending on your perspective). I could sympathize with a mother who, burdened by a difficult job and a bunch of other kids, thought that a premature child with Down Syndrome would be too much to handle and did what they could to ensure a stillbirth. I'd think they were despicable, but I'd understand. Likewise, I have plenty of sympathy for a mother who chooses not to saddle their unwed teenaged daughter with retarded child or the stigma of teen pregnancy and chooses to raise the kid as her own. Such would even be admirable*. But I have no sympathy for nativism. And, again, the nativist explanation — as crazy as it is — is the one that the Palins have shared.



* At least to the point that the teenaged mother begins a career in abstinence advocacy while the grand/mother uses the false story of the birth as a nugget of self-mythologizing along the path to building a national brand of bigotry-based identity politics

As for the rest of the things you've "disproved," you simply haven't. There are a couple of statements from people — one of whom is a freelancer who was in a romantic relationship with one Palin's closest aides, the other of whom wrote at the time that "she doesn't look pregnant" and was later charged with a post-birth "investigation" of the matter (why would that be necessary if he'd seen her pregnant belly already?) — and neither reports actually seeing her belly.

C'mon, Self Conscious. Tell it to me straight what, exactly, do you think happened?


the exact events and how they transpired are irreverent. the fact that she may have been stupid (which totally sounds like her) in not going to a certain hospital or boarding a plane when she wasn't supposed to doesn't amount to evidence that the baby isn't hers.

there are not three narratives like you claim, there are two:

"One lacks affirmative evidence. The other has loads of it.

You can believe that Palin was wearing a pregnancy suit and Hollywood-quality makeup for weeks, all before she had a national profile. You can believe that she fooled all of those journalists with her pregnancy costume, including the AP reporter who literally inspected Palin's belly in her office. You can believe that Palin, and her entire family, and her doctor, and her disgruntled former aide Frank Bailey, have been lying to the press in a tightly organized and mind-bogglingly elaborate conspiracy. You can believe that the medical workers who were involved in Trig's delivery were paid off or have simply kept inexplicably quiet about the hoax. You can believe that Bristol Palin gave birth to Trig and then had another child just eight months later.

Or you can believe that Trig is Sarah Palin's son."

you write in that last paragraph that there are a couple of statements by people who said "she doesn't look pregnant." so what, i listed 6 independent news outlets and reporters that have no reason to cover anything up for her, saying they did notice she was pregnant. Why are those couple of statements more valid than those that I posted. As for the man who wrote that she didn't look pregnant which started this whole thing, he changed those claims and didn't want to look like he was starting this conspiracy.

My question to you is, are all these people lying to cover up the fact that Palin didn't have a kid?

it sounds way more reasonable to believe that these people investigated it and disproved than to say that all these people are covering something up. Did the events transpire exactly how palin said they did? probably close to it. May she have exaggerated certain points to make a better political story? probably, i wouldn't put it past her since she has a proven history of doing that.

She would have also known while doing all these things that she was going to be selected to be vice president. Palin is stupid and not smart enough to have told the future and create this wild narrative just encase she was selected.

this is the same situation with the birth certificate, no matter how may times it is refuted, people are going to find some crazy little bit of information and person who claims to know other wise. or with the JFK murder, no matter how many times its proven that Lee Harvey did it alone, you get the person who says their sister's sister's brother's boyfriend saw him and Ruby in a club the night before.

there are many more important and politically relevant topics in which palin is completely wrong about and often ignorant that she should be called out on, that we don't need to make things up about an irrelevant birth of her child. you even point out some of those in that last reply that could stand on their own and don't need to be mixed with some crazy conspiracy theory. this makes them look weak cause the birth conspiracy is weak. its theories like this that make people like you and I, who disagree with palin, look bad, steeping down to the truthers level.
Post Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:12 am
 View user's profile Send private message
redball



Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 6871
Location: Northern New Jersey
 Reply with quote  

Self Conscious wrote:
She would have also known while doing all these things that she was going to be selected to be vice president. Palin is stupid and not smart enough to have told the future and create this wild narrative just encase she was selected.


No. Not at all. Her politics were the same when she was only an Alaskan figure and not national. Insisting that the child be born in Alaska has more to do with local politics than national. This has nothing to do with the VP pick nor any prescient ability to predict it.

That much should be apparent to you because you quoted reporters who say they were looking into it before the VP pick happened. If it weren't important on a state level then why would it be looked into at all at that point? It was looked into because her identity politics were important to her political career separate from any presidential aspirations.
Post Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:39 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
icarus502
kung-pwn master


Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 11289
Location: ann arbor
 Reply with quote  

FFFFUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!!

Again, you're not really responding to me, just repeating talking points. Other people's talking points. My last response was all about nativism and Alaskan nationalism, their impact on her politics, and the degree to which they might have influenced her to either have the baby in a psychopathic sort of way or to lie and say that she had the baby in a psychopathic sort of way when she'd really had the baby in a less psychopathic sort of way. In both of those scenarios, which are two of the three exhaustive scenarios that I posted, Sarah Palin is the mother of Trig Palin. My belief, of which I'm not completely sure, she is lying but she is still the mother.

There are three possible narratives (and a fourth, which I won't address except that it involves Bristol and an earlier timeline). To reiterate: 1) She's telling the truth (and is the mother). The psychopathic, baby-endangering truth. My speculation, based on her politics and her husband's words, was that — if this were true — it's about Alaskan nationalism and building a mythology for the sake of entrenching herself as an Alaskan politician. 2) She's lying (but still is the mother) but told her lies for all the same reasons a more crazy person would have actually done those things. This is what I believe is the most reasonable explanation. 3) She's lying. Not the mama.

I wrote that whole reply because of your suggestion that my suggestion that Alaskan nationalism had anything to do with it was "biased" when that is the Palins' own story. It indicates that you're unserious about "debunking" but more serious about namecalling and quoting extensively from others' hole-filled works.

You're all about some ad hominem — Birthers! Oswald! — but not so much about addressing exactly what Redball and I are writing. It's frustrating. I'm getting some serious procrastination done in writing this stuff, acknowledge my (not actually doing my) work!

And you're writing this stuff about "oh she would have had to have been super duper prescient and known that she'd be a VP pick." Nothing I've said assumes that. I've made it clear that, whatever happened, it was mostly about her building her standing in Alaska. However, it should be noted that the notion that she came out of nowhere to be picked by McCain is false revisionism. More astute political observers than I thought she had a shot before she was picked, but — for the record — so did I! In July 2008, on this forum, she was the only realistic candidate that I could name!

icarus502 wrote:

McCain really needs to pick a white guy, maybe a white lady (and, then, probably only if it's Sarah Palin) if he has any hopes of winning this thing. The only people-of-color who could help him at all -- Powell (especially) and Rice -- won't even say they're supporting him (and probably aren't).


She was a rising star, nationally speaking, and was a long-list sort of figure. That's why she was picked, because she was a sexy pick, like when that guy who doesn't follow the NBA says "Yeah, man it looks like the Grizzlies are gonna win it all this year." McCain didn't know what he was picking, just picking a name, a woman, someone cute, who made a good first impression. If she were more of a known quantity, her faults would have been more salient, initially, but she was a name that political folks had been bandying about and she had some of the most important hacks, like Bill Kristol, whispering her name wherever they went. Still, you don't do this, whatever she did, because you know you're going to be the VP-pick, you do them because you're only holding court on the political equivalent Wisteria Lane and don't realize that you'll soon be under such scrutiny.


Quote:

you write in that last paragraph that there are a couple of statements by people who said "she doesn't look pregnant." so what, i listed 6 independent news outlets and reporters that have no reason to cover anything up for her, saying they did notice she was pregnant. Why are those couple of statements more valid than those that I posted. As for the man who wrote that she didn't look pregnant which started this whole thing, he changed those claims and didn't want to look like he was starting this conspiracy.

My question to you is, are all these people lying to cover up the fact that Palin didn't have a kid?


If someone says they're pregnant, you believe them. If they show you their belly (clothed, as it was in all of those examples), you don't suspect that they're wearing a prosthetic If you learn someone was pregnant after you saw them, you might think "well I guess she did look a little heavier." If you expect someone to be pregnant, they will look pregnant to you. Ask any newly married woman if they've ever had anyone mistakenly think they'd gained weight for pregnancy, many of them will say yes. I don't believe anyone is lying per se (with the possibly exception of Steve Quinn). At this point, stating an opinion either way, and ex-post facto, is politically dangerous (probably moreso for those working in Alaska). I don't see how that could be considered proof of anything in particular.


Last edited by icarus502 on Thu Apr 28, 2011 11:02 am; edited 2 times in total
Post Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:45 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
icarus502
kung-pwn master


Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 11289
Location: ann arbor
 Reply with quote  

redball wrote:
Self Conscious wrote:
She would have also known while doing all these things that she was going to be selected to be vice president. Palin is stupid and not smart enough to have told the future and create this wild narrative just encase she was selected.


No. Not at all. Her politics were the same when she was only an Alaskan figure and not national. Insisting that the child be born in Alaska has more to do with local politics than national. This has nothing to do with the VP pick nor any prescient ability to predict it.

That much should be apparent to you because you quoted reporters who say they were looking into it before the VP pick happened. If it weren't important on a state level then why would it be looked into at all at that point? It was looked into because her identity politics were important to her political career separate from any presidential aspirations.


Yeah.
Post Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:46 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Self Conscious



Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 322
Location: Sleeping in a box car dreaming of lost starts
 Reply with quote  

icarus502 wrote:
FFFFUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!!

Again, you're not really responding to me, just repeating talking points. Other people's talking points. My last response was all about nativism and Alaskan nationalism, their impact on her politics, and the degree to which they might have influenced her to either have the baby in a psychopathic sort of way or to lie and say that she had the baby in a psychopathic sort of way when she'd really had the baby in a less psychopathic sort of way.


so why even have scenario 3? we have established that as false. As for if she had a baby in a certain psychopathic way and whether that was effected by her politics, i don't know, you don't either. The fact that she may have put the already vulnerable baby in danger is really irrelevant to these theories. By putting your theory of how she would do anything to bolster her imagine with the whole its not her baby theory is making it look weak.

I don't think its realistic to say that she would "lie and say that she had the baby in a psychopathic sort of way when she'd really had the baby in a less psychopathic sort of way." She really doesn't benefit that much from do so.

icarus502 wrote:


In both of those scenarios, which are two of the three exhaustive scenarios that I posted, Sarah Palin is the mother of Trig Palin. My belief, of which I'm not completely sure, she is lying but she is still the mother.

There are three possible narratives (and a fourth, which I won't address except that it involves Bristol and an earlier timeline). To reiterate: 1) She's telling the truth (and is the mother). The psychopathic, baby-endangering truth. My speculation, based on her politics and her husband's words, was that — if this were true — it's about Alaskan nationalism and building a mythology for the sake of entrenching herself as an Alaskan politician. 2) She's lying (but still is the mother) but told her lies for all the same reasons a more crazy person would have actually done those things. This is what I believe is the most reasonable explanation. 3) She's lying. Not the mama.



Do i really think that someone as dumb as palin thought out the whole, if i have the baby in Alaska then it will make me look better there, situation? no, i think that she didn't think (which seems to be her MO) and went back to Alaska, endangering the baby, with no alternative motives. there doesn't have to be a conspiracy. it doesn't have to be she did it with alternative motives or she lied about it because she had alternative motives. It could be just the scenario i bolded above.

icarus502 wrote:
I wrote that whole reply because of your suggestion that my suggestion that Alaskan nationalism had anything to do with it was "biased" when that is the Palins' own story. It indicates that you're unserious about "debunking" but more serious about namecalling and quoting extensively from others' hole-filled works.


where is the name calling? you want me to stake my opinion and ignore those who actually researched the topic? you're so quick to point out that the works have holes, what are they? you seem to agree that it is her kid but disagree with how she handled and/or phrased the whole situation. It is by this logic that the hole-filled works do nothing to bolster your claims because they aren't even about that.

icarus502 wrote:

You're all about some ad hominem — Birthers! Oswald! — but not so much about addressing exactly what Redball and I are writing.


redball talked about how some people have seen her and didn't think she was pregnant, i responded by showing plenty of people who did.

and starting you reply with FU isn't. I've also asked you some question that you have not responded to.

icarus502 wrote:
It's frustrating. I'm getting some serious procrastination done in writing this stuff, acknowledge my (not actually doing my) work!

And you're writing this stuff about "oh she would have had to have been super duper prescient and known that she'd be a VP pick." Nothing I've said assumes that. I've made it clear that, whatever happened, it was mostly about her building her standing in Alaska. However, it should be noted that the notion that she came out of nowhere to be picked by McCain is false revisionism. More astute political observers than I thought she had a shot before she was picked, but — for the record — so did I! In July 2008, on this forum, she was the only realistic candidate that I could name!


i never said she came out of nowhere. and building up her standing Alaska would conflict with the VP role.

and again, i think she didn't have any alternative motives but if i had to choose one of your scenarios i would choose 2.
Post Thu Apr 28, 2011 1:35 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
icarus502
kung-pwn master


Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 11289
Location: ann arbor
 Reply with quote  

For the record, "FFFFFUUUU" doesn't mean "F.U." I may or may not respond beyond that, as I'm busy.
Post Thu Apr 28, 2011 1:45 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
redball



Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 6871
Location: Northern New Jersey
 Reply with quote  

Self Conscious wrote:
icarus502 wrote:

You're all about some ad hominem — Birthers! Oswald! — but not so much about addressing exactly what Redball and I are writing.


redball talked about how some people have seen her and didn't think she was pregnant, i responded by showing plenty of people who did.



No, you quoted people who said they did before I said that. What my point was is that there are conflicting reports on that matter and that you are *both* biased and allowing that bias to influence your filtering of facts. You're both cherry picking here. That there are people who say they saw Palin pregnant does not disprove that there are people who say they saw no evidence she was.

Fact: There are reports and interviews of people who were close to Palin that state different opinions of whether she was pregnant and when exactly she announced it to those close to her.
Post Thu Apr 28, 2011 1:50 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
AdamBomb



Joined: 05 Mar 2004
Posts: 3183
Location: Louisiana
 Reply with quote  

I seriously doubt that Palin faked her pregnancy. There would have been too many people that would have spilled the beans for some cash, especially by now. Its almost laughable. We can't even keep our top secret government files off of Wikileaks, but Palin can keep this explosive secret under wraps?

Glenn Beck killed somebody and Lou Dobbs dropped the body off in Mexico (no evidence that disproves this).

Barbara Walters is an undercover CIA agent (as are Pat Sajak and Mark Summers).

Kate Plus 8 was never pregnant (and those kids are really not siblings). TLC was just desperate to rev up their ratings.

Ryan Seacrest is really a computer generated hologram and not a real person.

Sadaam Husein is still alive and lives in a condo in Pensacola. They hung one of his many body doubles.
Post Thu Apr 28, 2011 2:19 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
icarus502
kung-pwn master


Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 11289
Location: ann arbor
 Reply with quote  

AdamBomb wrote:
I seriously doubt that Palin faked her pregnancy. There would have been too many people that would have spilled the beans for some cash, especially by now. Its almost laughable. We can't even keep our top secret government files off of Wikileaks, but Palin can keep this explosive secret under wraps?

Glenn Beck killed somebody and Lou Dobbs dropped the body off in Mexico (no evidence that disproves this).

Barbara Walters is an undercover CIA agent (as are Pat Sajak and Mark Summers).

Kate Plus 8 was never pregnant (and those kids are really not siblings). TLC was just desperate to rev up their ratings.

Ryan Seacrest is really a computer generated hologram and not a real person.

Sadaam Husein is still alive and lives in a condo in Pensacola. They hung one of his many body doubles.


You're right, there are no high-profile people with big embarrassing secrets that were later uncovered.
Post Thu Apr 28, 2011 2:31 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
redball



Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 6871
Location: Northern New Jersey
 Reply with quote  

icarus502 wrote:
You're right, there are no high-profile people with big embarrassing secrets that were later uncovered.


John Edwards LOL

http://www.google.com/search?q=ffffffuuuuuuuuu

It's sad that no one is actually arguing that she's not Trig's mother, yet there are still people arguing against something that no one here believes.
Post Thu Apr 28, 2011 2:43 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Self Conscious



Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 322
Location: Sleeping in a box car dreaming of lost starts
 Reply with quote  

redball wrote:
icarus502 wrote:
You're right, there are no high-profile people with big embarrassing secrets that were later uncovered.


John Edwards LOL

http://www.google.com/search?q=ffffffuuuuuuuuu

It's sad that no one is actually arguing that she's not Trig's mother, yet there are still people arguing against something that no one here believes.


did you even read what i wrote? im saying that its ridiculous to think that she had the baby in a healthy way and said she did it in a dangerous way, and that its ridiculous to think that she had the baby in a dangerous way just for the sake of looking good. you're giving her intelligence to much credit, she would have had to plan this out ahead of time and she cant even make a comprehensive sentence. the fact that she was an incompetent mother doesn't mean a conspiracy exists.
Post Fri Apr 29, 2011 2:43 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
redball



Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 6871
Location: Northern New Jersey
 Reply with quote  

You make assumptions about her intelligence. I'm not going to claim that she's particularly intelligent, but there is one thing she's fairly savvy at: politics. She didn't get to be a governor and a major player in her party without having political savvy.

So you're letting your belief that she's a dolt impair your ability to analyze evidence that she may have tweaked her story to fit a preexisting narrative: that she's dedicated to Alaska above all else and she's such a strong, politically dedicated woman she won't let a little thing like child birth interfere with a speech.

Also, don't conflate scenario 3, the Trig birther theory, with scenario 2. Scenario 2 seems to have been built by analyzing the amazingly stupid, shocking, and fantastical story of Trig's birth and trying to apply a pattern of normal child birth on it. (This is as much a criticism as an observation, mind you.) Scenario 3 is as stupid, shocking, and fantastical as the official story. Scenario 2 relies on few complicit actors deviating their stories from scenario 1.

Let's be clear on this: Icarus's scenario 2 involves white lies that are difficult to prove or disprove, not huge conspiracies that involve dozens of people. It's why they would work. After all, how many people were with Palin from the time she claims she went into labor all the way through to the delivery? So it's entirely plausible. The people who would necessarily lie about this are either bound by confidentiality or are close enough to Palin that they wouldn't want to diminish her character.

The problem is that there's not good evidence of either, and it certainly doesn't matter as much as it would if Trig wasn't her kid. So we're into diminishing returns where the only thing we're speculating about is what kind of character Palin has... which I'm not sure why you take such offense to the thought of that. None the less I think it's been argued to the point of no longer being fun.
Post Fri Apr 29, 2011 6:19 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
icarus502
kung-pwn master


Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 11289
Location: ann arbor
 Reply with quote  

Looks like she's running for president.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/05/25/palins_secret_weapon_new_film_to_premiere_in_june_109949.html
Post Tue May 24, 2011 10:41 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Plum Puddin'



Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 1829
Location: Run Ebola, Run.
 Reply with quote  

Post Tue May 24, 2011 10:44 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
redball



Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 6871
Location: Northern New Jersey
 Reply with quote  

She's back to form guys.

Post Fri Jun 03, 2011 6:08 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:12 pm
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon