Michele Bachmann goes all "deer in the headlights" while being grilled by David Gregory. This is why Teabaggers avoid the mainstream press.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Check out those bug eyes.  She has NO idea what to say to this line of questioning.

"I am running for the Presidency of the United States. I am not running to be anyone's judge."

"But you have judged them."

"I..I..I don't judge them. I don't judge them. I am running for Presidency of the United States

WTF? Gregory reads off her own statements and she acts as if she has never heard them before.

And besides these clearly homophobic statements, she and her husband have charged the Federal government, through Medicaid, to provide psychologically damaging "reparative" therapies in an attempt to alter the sexual proclivities of homosexual men. If she and her husband Marcus had not judged this lifestyle as deviant than why would they provide a service to try and change it?

When Bachmann is asked if, as President (I'm sorry "Presidency"), she would appoint an openly gay person to her cabinet or to the courts, she lists three criteria: "Where do they stand on the Constitution, are you competent, and do you share my views?"

It should be crystal clear to anybody that, based on Bachmann's stated opinion about homosexuality, that the last one ("Do you share my views?"), ABSOLUTELY precludes any chance of a gay man or woman being provided any opportunities during a Bachmann Presidency.

I know she and her people probably think she effectively danced around that question, but I have little doubt that most Americans, especially gay Americans, had little trouble recognizing how the rights of homosexuals would be treated if Michele Bachmann had her way. 

By the way, I am not a David Gregory fan as a rule, but I thought he did a pretty good job here.

Sarah Palin's week just got a whole lot worse as Shailey Tripp reveals what she knew, and when she knew it.

From Shailey's blog:

The next few days I will be writing about How The Lies of Sarah Palin turn into TRUTH as it pertains to me. 

I know for a fact (and yes with proof), that Sarah Palin knew that at the very least a prostitute who claimed to have sex with Todd, her husband, was going to go public with the information. I know for a fact, Sarah Palin, was told about all the emails that showed there was a relationship between her husband, Todd, and this person. Furthermore, I know Sarah Palin was told that there were even emails showing that Todd could be involved in running or involved in a ................prositution ring. 

This was 1 week before Christmas 2010- Fri. Dec 17, 2010.

To read the rest, and yes you DO want to read the rest, just click the link and head on over to Shailey's blog.


You know there are two names that attract the most aggressive and negative remarks from the trolls when they appear on this blog.  And those names are Mercede Johnston and Shailey Tripp.

I am constantly cautioned by these helpful little imps not to believe anything that they say, and told (using a plethora of exclamation points) that they are LIARS!!!!!!! HATEFUL, HATEFUL, LIARS!!!!!!

Here's the funny thing.  I have never caught them lying to me.

I have had dozens, and I mean dozens, of people attempt to deceive, manipulate, or outright lie to me. But never them.

In fact Sadie's version of events (Often either preceded by, or backed up by, Sherry's version of events.) has never changed.

People have attacked her character, screamed obscenities at her in the grocery store, stolen her mail, and vandalized both her car and her house, and still she has refused to allow herself to be intimidated into keeping her mouth shut. The only time she stayed quiet was when she was hoping that by doing so she would get to see Tripp.  But after numerous promises made, and then broken, Sadie realized that the Palins were simply using the last hold they had over her family to control them.

Now that control is no more.

As for Shailey, well Shailey is the only source I have ever known that passed five, count them five, polygraph tests with flying colors.

I have talked to many bloggers, journalists, and authors who have spoken to her, and they all said that she was very credible.  The only thing that keeps her story from getting the kind of coverage it deserves is lack of physical proof, which we are still struggling to have released from APD. I have seen some of the evidence, and so far it all backs up Shailey's story, and refutes much of what official APD spokesman Lt. David Parker said publicly.

Once she is able to get her hands on that evidence I think her story will blow up again in a major way.

Especially if all of the people claiming that Palin is DEFINITELY launching her bid for the GOP nomination on September 3rd, are accurate. If, or when, that happens this whole thing  is going to get much, much more interesting.

Coming soon, an update on the progress of the "babygate" book.

Sarah Palin on March 26, 2008. Eighteen days before "birth" of Trig Palin.

I currently have in my possession an e-mail from the author of the upcoming "babygate" book.

I will post it fairly early tomorrow morning because, and some of you may not be aware of this, IM receives more visitors on the weekdays than on the weekends.  In order for the most people to have the opportunity to read what Fred has written I decided it would be best to post it on a day that saw more traffic so that I would not have people asking me over and over again about an update.

I think that most of you will be very pleased with the information, though for some of the more impatient ones it might be a little frustrating.

Just like with Joe and Geoffrey's books, there are ALWAYS new revelations which threaten to change the tenor of the book or delay its release.  I learned long ago that patience is my best friend.

Speaking of patience, I should also let you know that there are many MORE revelations coming out about the Grizzled Mama, and her "Alaska mafia." Including one that I heard just the other day that I am hoping like crazy I can manage to prove, because even among the most jaded Palin watchers this one will be huge.

One thing I can share is that some, who are claiming to be in the know, are convinced that Palin actually WILL announce her candidacy during her speech in Iowa on September 3rd.

I remain somewhat skeptical, but as I have said before I would not put ANYTHING past this lunatic.

I know a couple of authors who would be thrilled if Palin DID launch a short lived, ultimately doomed campaign in early September.  And I do have to admit that it would certainly bring more players into the "Sources for Gryphen" family.

I guess that would not be all bad now would it?

Update: I was just now watching Meet the Press, and sitting there with my plate of eggs watching David Gregory ask David Plouffe just WHICH bills the government will pay for certain if the debt ceiling does NOT get raised by Tuesday suddenly just pissed me the hell off!

So I would like to vent a little.

When the Tea Party was in its infancy and nobody was paying it much attention, the Koch brothers arranged for Sarah Palin to make appearances on their behalf and essentially, along with the spastic Glenn Beck, become the face of the Teabaggers. Because of her unrivaled name recognition she brought tons of undeserved attention to what was clearly a very unsophisticated astro-turf group of angry racists, who, over time, were polished with corporate money enough so that they were able to choose and back candidates who are currently holding our country hostage.

While that was taking place there were those who were working overtime to convince me to drop the babygate story because it was never going to "make any difference."

"Just focus on the wild ride story, Gryph.  That will be enough to stop her if enough people hear about it.  The babygate story just makes you, and ALL of us, seem like crazy conspiracy theorists."

Of course I refused, and as my reward I found myself isolated.  I learned over time that journalists were steered away from me, for fear I would bring up"that crazy conspiracy story."

At one point I was so close I could taste it, to REALLY blowing this whole thing up. But I was sabotaged by those I considered my friends. In my personal opinion if I had received more support, and if others had worked side by side with me, Sarah Palin would NEVER have been able to provide the spark that the Koch brothers used to start the Teabagger bonfire.

So I would just like to take a moment to say FUCK YOU!

Fuck you for playing it safe.  Fuck you for worrying about appearances more than truth.  And fuck you for being a coward.

And while I am on this rant I would also like to say fuck you to those who wanted the babygate story all for themselves.  Fuck you for driving people off of the net who were selflessly working to bring this story to the American people.  Fuck you for chasing away sources who were timidly coming forward, until they realized that people might soon learn their true identities. And fuck you for damaging the reputation of good people because YOUR ego demanded that you get credit for EVERYTHING.

Okay I am done now.  Sorry if some of you found that offensive or a little out of character, but damn I have been holding that inside for years.

The babygate story is NOT just about a mother protecting her daughter, or her family.  It is MUCH deeper and uglier than that. And once it is really out there in the public consciousness, it should serve as the stepping stone to revealing all kinds of political manipulations and Faustian deals that might finally awaken a slumbering populace and get them to focus on taking back their country from the corporations and political fat cats who have held the reins of power for much, much too long.

And with that Gryphen steps off of his soapbox.  Thank you for listening.

Are you prepared for spiritual warfare in the United States? Well perhaps you are not, but many others are more than ready.

Courtesy of Aljazeera:

Prior to 9/11, the Taliban government in Afghanistan did not register very much on American radar screens, with one notable exception: when it blew up two colossal images of the Buddha in Bamiyan province in early 2001. But destruction of treasured artifacts isn't just limited to the Taliban.

There's a right-wing politico-religious presence centred in the US, but with a global reach, engaging in similar practises, destroying religious and cultural artifacts as a key aspect of its ideology of "strategic level spiritual warfare" (SLSW).

Until recently a fringe evangelical movement, warned against as deviant, "spiritual warfare" is rapidly positioning itself within America's mainstream political right. It's well past time for political journalists to start covering what this movement is up to.

As an example, leaders have bragged online about the destruction of Native American religious artifacts, which their twisted ideology somehow sees as a liberating act, promoting "reconciliation" between estranged groups of people. Critics, however, see it as reflecting an eliminationist mindset, while traditional conservative evangelicals have denounced the ideology as un-biblical. Some even claim it is actually a form of pagan practice dressed up in Christian clothes, according such artifacts a spiritual power that the Bible itself denies. 

The ultimate goal is to replace secular democracy, both in America and around the world, with a Christian theocracy, an ideology known as "dominionism". The supposed purpose is to "purify" the world for Christ's return - again, strikingly similar to what the Taliban believe, but also significantly at odds with more common, long-standing Christian beliefs about the "end times", as well as the nature and purpose of prayer, and the roles of human and divine power. 

This is a VERY informative article which touches on many of the same frightening themes that fans of Leah Burton, and God's Own Party,  are probably already aware. The piece explores the New Apostolic Reformation, the Seven Mountains Mandate, the influence of Sarah Palin, and also lays out the three levels of Spiritual Warfare.

Ground level spiritual warfare is casting out demons from individuals. Occult level spiritual warfare is a confrontation with demons operating through witchcraft and esoteric philosophies (examples are Freemasonry and Tibetan Buddhism). Strategic Level Spiritual Warfare is the highest level, dealing with confrontation of territorial principalities that control entire communities, ethnic groups, religions, and nations.

Like I said the article is quite informative, however it is also a chilling read that might cause you one or two sleepless night.  So take care.  

Michele Bachmann gets a note from her doctor saying she can TOO run for President!

There has been a lot of talk recently about Michele Bachmann's debilitating migraines, and the fact that such a medical condition, which is significantly exacerbated due to stress, might make her unfit for a job as President of the United States.

Gee, ya think?

Oddly enough this has inspired a number of journalists and political pundits to leap to her defense inferring that reporting on her migraines is sexist.

Which is interesting, since Michele Bachmann herself has blamed the migraines on her high heel shoes. Which, I am sure you will all agree, is in NO way sexist.

Anyhow in order to put the issue to rest Shelly got a note from her doctor, which essentially says she is excused from gym class but CAN run for student body president.

So there you go.  Michele Bachmann's blinding headaches are NO reason she should not be considered a viable GOP candidate for the most important political office in the land. No really, her doctor said so.

Now can we get back to focusing on the more important things, like the fact that she is batshit crazy and that she has virtually NO understanding of American history please?

We knew it was coming! Fox News has "Brain Room" where the phone records of Americans are being hacked.

Courtesy of Business Insider:

A former producer with Fox News claimed in a lengthy essay gaining new traction this week that the conservative television station has a "Brain Room" in its New York headquarters, which enables employees to view private telephone records with ease.

Though published years ago, the allegations have returned to relevance in the wake of the phone hacking scandals that have rocked News Corporation to its very core, threatening to topple one of the world's largest and most powerful media conglomerates.

According to former Fox News executive Dan Cooper, whose gripes with his former employer run quite deep, Fox News chief Roger Ailes allegedly had him design the so-called "Brain Room" to facilitate counter-intelligence efforts and other "black ops."

In a lengthy 2008 diatribe said to have doubled as a book pitch, Cooper claimed his own phone records had been hacked by Fox News employees, who he says used them to pinpoint him as a source used by David Brock, who founded liberal watchdog group Media Matters.

"Ailes knew I had given Brock the interview," he wrote. "Certainly Brock didn't tell him. Of course. Fox News had gotten Brock's telephone records from the phone company, and my phone number was on the list. Deep in the bowels of 1211 Avenue of the Americas, News Corporation's New York headquarters, was what Roger called the Brain Room. Most people thought it was simply the research department of Fox News. But unlike virtually everybody else, because I had to design and build the Brain Room, I knew it also housed a counterintelligence and black ops office. So accessing phone records was easy pie."

See?  I told you it would lead back to Fox News!

My fervent hope is that the FBI get themselves a search warrant and GAIN ACCESS TO THAT ROOM!

Ladies and gentlemen I would bet my house that if they could get in there THAT would be the end of Fox News, Roger Ailes, and Rupert Murdoch.  There is no doubt in my mind.

You know the part that really pisses me off?  That I already KNEW about this story, and even wrote about it, but it completely slipped my mind until I read this article.

Some investigative reporter I turned out to be.

Clearly Rupert Murdoch is in a panic and desperately trying to control the damage before it spreads too far to contain. But will it be enough?

From Yahoo News:

Rupert Murdoch apologized to victims of criminal phone hacking by one of his tabloids and accepted the resignations of News Corp's top two newspaper executives, Rebekah Brooks and Les Hinton.

Moving to gain control of a scandal washing over his global business, the U.S.-based magnate made a personal apology to the parents of a murdered schoolgirl in what appeared to be an admission that the News of the World, then edited by Brooks and overseen by Hinton, had in 2002 hacked into the voicemails of their missing daughter.

It was that damning allegation, in a rival newspaper 10 days ago, which reignited a 5-year-old scandal that has forced Murdoch to close the News of the World, Britain's best-selling Sunday paper, and drop a $12 billion plan to buy full control of highly profitable pay-TV operator BSkyB.

The crisis has broken the grip that Murdoch, 80, had over British politics for three decades as leaders from Margaret Thatcher, through Labor's Tony Blair to current Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron sought his support.

It has also forced him to make concessions to public calls that the executives who were in charge at the time of the scandal be held accountable.

Somebody left a comment on another thread that I should not get my hopes up about this scandal damaging Fox News, or destroying their credibility along with the other News Corp entities.

Yeah maybe not, but this has been a pretty satisfying summer so far, so I think I will follow my President's advice and embrace the audacity of hope.

How about you guys?

Rachel Maddow interviews Bill Moyers on his views concerning the Rupert Murdoch scandal and the state of journalism in America.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This is an interview of one of the giants of American journalism in this country conducted by one of the very best reporters we have working today.

In other words it is MUST see!

Keith Olbermann reveals the tactics that Rupert Murdoch uses to keep his employees in line.

 My favorite part comes toward the end.

 "And when the tide recedes there will be nothing left. Not of News Corp, not of Fox News, not of Rupert Murdoch."

See? Even Keith Olbermann believes that it is possible THIS will be the end of Murdoch.

Maybe this is like in a "Peter Pan" play.

If all of us believe and clap hard enough, instead of bringing Tinkerbell back to life, we can wish for the demise of Fox News. And it will happen.

Worth a shot.

(H/T to Politicususa.)

The News Corp scandal might just turn out to be Keith Olbermann's all time favorite story.

Here is a partial transcript by Raw Story:

Current TV’s Keith Olbermann summarized the latest developments in the scandal before turning to Murdoch biographer Michael Wolff for commentary. Wolff began by saying that the elder Murdoch should really be out apologizing to everyone who has been harmed by his company’s actions, but “that’s not Rupert Murdoch.”

“This is a company that’s all about — it’s about power,” Wolff explained. “You hurt me, you diss me, we smack you down.” He added, “These people will do anything.”

“Is James Murdoch really at legal risk?” Olbermann asked.

“I think it’s an exaggeration, somewhat,” Wolff replied, but he quickly noted, “Anything could happen now. … The unimaginable is now occurring.”

“This is the snowball effect,” Wolff said, explaining that when it comes to Rupert Murdoch, “these politicians … in the UK have had to put up with this guy for a long time. He’s never been pleasant about it. He’s always extracted blood. So finally there’s an opportunity. ‘We can get rid of this guy.’”
Wolff concluded by saying that we can expect “new revelations every day” as “more shoes drop.”

You can almost see Olbermann salivating over the potential demise of Rupert Murdoch's empire.  I find it very hard to blame him.

(H/T to Politicususa.)

Carl Bernstein refers to phone hacking scandal as "Murdoch"s Watergate." Well, he should know.

Courtesy of Newsweek:

The hacking scandal currently shaking Rupert Murdoch’s empire will surprise only those who have willfully blinded themselves to that empire’s pernicious influence on journalism in the English-speaking world. Too many of us have winked in amusement at the salaciousness without considering the larger corruption of journalism and politics promulgated by Murdoch Culture on both sides of the Atlantic.

The facts of the case are astonishing in their scope. Thousands of private phone messages hacked, presumably by people affiliated with the Murdoch-owned News of the World newspaper, with the violated parties ranging from Prince William and actor Hugh Grant to murder victims and families of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. The arrest of Andy Coulson, former press chief to Prime Minister David Cameron, for his role in the scandal during his tenure as the paper’s editor. The arrest (for the second time) of Clive Goodman, the paper’s former royals editor. The shocking July 7 announcement that the paper would cease publication three days later, putting hundreds of employees out of work. Murdoch’s bid to acquire full control of cable-news company BSkyB placed in jeopardy. Allegations of bribery, wiretapping, and other forms of lawbreaking—not to mention the charge that emails were deleted by the millions in order to thwart Scotland Yard’s investigation.

This article is a "must read" for anybody who is closely following this scandal.  Bernstein carefully outlines Murdoch's empire and does not hold back in revealing its overall negative impact on journalism around the world, and particularly in America, and how this indefensible breach of the public trust might serve to undermine a free press in Enlgand, and may have ripple effects that spread much, much further.

Once you have read through that wonderful piece I urge you to visit Philly.com to learn that the things Murdoch has done here in the United States may in fact be much worse than what he did in Britain.  For example:

Iraq and the war on terrorism: America's misguided "pre-emptive war" in the oil-rich Persian Gulf would not have been possible unless the 9/11 attacks and a response to terrorism became conflated with Saddam Hussein's Iraq, which for all its horrors had nothing to do with the assault on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The Fox News Channel, and its parade of GOP-talking-point infused hosts and military "experts," helped to make sure that wrongful conflation took place, as later evidence proved.

A 2003 poll by the Program on International Policy (PIPA) at the University of Maryland and Knowledge Networks found that regular Fox News viewers were significantly more likely than other news consumers to believe one of three significant falsehoods about the Iraq war -- that Iraq was somehow connected to 9/11, that weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, or that global opinion was in favor of the war. These jingoistic myths -- most heavily adopted by Fox viewers -- fueled years of continued fighting in a war in which thousands of Americans and Iraqi civilians died needlessly.

After reading that I imagine that you are just about as pissed off as I am at the entire fucking Rupert Murdoch empire! So allow me to offer you the chance to cleanse your palate by watching ex-NOW editor Paul McMullen getting his ass handed to him again by yet another British actor, Steve Coogan.



That McMullen douchebag is a special brand of sleazy isn't he? Just watching him on camera makes my skin crawl.

The hero who first reported on the News Corp phone hacking scandal was actor Hugh Grant?

You have to watch this exchange between Grant and ex-NOW reporter Paul McMullen to believe it. Grant essentially destroys this guy's credibility with ease.

Well now I am a little less embarrassed about owning "Love Actually" and having memorized several scenes from "Notting Hill." (Okay, that second one I still find embarrassing.)

The fallout from News Corp. hacking scandal. spreads to US, ad buyers becoming nervous.

Courtesy of AdWeek:

The scandal has buyers trying to reconcile the outrageousness of the charges surrounding Rupert Murdoch’s U.K. tabloid with News Corp.'s significant U.S. footprint, which includes Fox News as well as the straitlaced Wall Street Journal. Some said that while they haven’t suspended advertising in News Corp.’s U.S. properties, they're growing wary about doing business with the media giant.
“You always wonder when anybody has a scandal,” said GregClausen, chief media officer of Doner in Detroit. Clausen said that while he would still consider News Corp. properties “viable” options for clients, he added, “It puts you a little bit on edge.”

Robin Steinberg, director of publishing activation at MediaVest, which is one of the biggest print-buying shops, controlling some $1 billion in annual spending, said news of the scandal is prompting her to seek reassurances from News Corp. representatives in the U.S.

“We are addressing the situation through conversations and explanation,” she said. “The expectation is that this approach and behavior will not carry over here into the states. Certain guarantees might be necessary for clients to be comfortable allocating money to these properties.”
Others flat-out declined to comment, preferring to leave the talking to clients. “It’s a little too touchy,” said a rep for one major buying agency.

One who was prepared to give News Corp. the full benefit of the doubt was Steve Farella, founder of TargetCast tcm.

“It clearly makes an agency and any client think twice about supporting that newspaper,” Farella said of News of the World. “But in my heart, I don’t believe that any company owned by News Corp. has a policy to break the laws.”

“This doesn’t make me think twice about doing business [with News Corp.],” he continued. “We are not in News of the World, and I don’t believe that the errant practice... is being duplicated at Fox News here in America.”

Really? That is mighty naive.

My money, says that whatever Murdoch was able to get away with in England he did here in the good old United States as well.  Murdoch is an arrogant, competitive prick, and I have little doubt that much more will be coming out about this scandal, including how widespread it truly is, in the very near future.

If Fox News suffers a significant blow to their credibility here in the states, the Republicans will be left without a handy megaphone to spred their lies and misinformation. That could render them all but politically impotent.

Damn, I need more popcorn again!

Rupert Murdoch tabloid at center of phone hacking scandal in Britian to close down.

It looks like the News of the World, has hacked their last phone.

News International says it is shutting down the News of the World tabloid that is at the center of Britain's phone hacking scandal.

James Murdoch, who heads the newspaper's European operations, says the 168-year-old newspaper will publish its last edition Sunday. The scandal has cost the paper prestige and prompted dozens of companies to pull their ads.

The Rupert Murdoch-owned tabloid is accused of hacking into the cell phone messages of victims ranging from missing schoolgirls to grieving families, celebrities, royals and politicians in a quest for attention-grabbing headlines.

Police say they are examining 4,000 names of people who may have been targeted by the paper.

The Sunday-only newspaper has acknowledged that it hacked into the phones of politicians, celebrities and royal aides, but in recent days the allegations have expanded to take in the phones of missing children, the relatives of terrorist victims and families of soldiers killed in Afghanistan.

Well that is one down, is it too much to hope that Fox News will be next?

I know I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

This just might be one of the most important stories unfolding right now.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

There are a few of us in the "new media" who believe that Murdoch and his crew might not have limited their phone hacking to the other side of the pond. 

I would certainly not be surprised to learn that there are a few phones belonging to politicians, or media competitors, or sources over here that might have reason to be concerned as well.

Unscrupulous

Professor Brad Scharlott and Laura Novak continue their fascinating conversation over on Laura's blog.

Courtesy of Laura's blog:

LN: But let’s get back to the question of harm. What is the harm, Palin supporters ask, even if she did fake the birth of Trig?

BS: I would say that a pathology of fear has enveloped much of Alaska, especially the Wasilla area, over this issue. You have to remember that Sarah Palin is demonstrably ruthless, unethical, and vengeful – it’s good to keep in mind her campaign to destroy the career of Mike Wooten, her former brother-in-law. Plus, in the space of four weeks in late 2008 and early 2009, fires in Wasilla damaged Palin’s church and caused the death of a former neonatal nurse, Dar Miller. The church fire was due to arson; the cause of the fire at Miller’s home was not determined. Some people speculated that adoption records perished in the church fire, but I can find no confirmation of that.

There’s no evidence linking the Palins to those fires. But several Alaskans have told me that Wasilla residents fear they may suffer similar fates if they cross the Palins. Certainly Alaskans have good reason to fear they may lose their jobs if they anger Sarah Palin, as safety commissioner Walter Monaghan did when he refused to fire Mike Wooten. She may not be in power now, but many of her loyal appointees are.

LN: And I might add here that I know first hand about people who talk, and then clam up, because they know that people are whispering about them. I know about people in government putting pressure on reporters not to report. About newspaper reporters who were talking to me one day, and then shutting down the conversation the next.

BS: And then there are stories of people who know too much or said the wrong thing about the Palins, who then suffered vandalism or worse, such as the documented case of a car window being shot out while children were inside – the apparent reason: an anti-Palin personalized license place.

I would further argue, Laura, that this pathology of fear has spawned a pathology of deceit. You recently noted how all the reporters, editors and columnists at the Alaska Daily News have seemingly been told to sing from the same hymnal concerning the fake birth question – contradicting earlier actions by ADN staff – even though the newspaper provides no documentary evidence to support the claim that Palin birthed Trig. And as I’ve noted before, former ADN reporter Wes Loy, who famously wrote that Palin “simply does not look pregnant,” for some reason decided to recant, despite evidence I provided that directly contradicts his alleged change of heart.

I am reminded of the fall of Saddam Hussein. After the liberation of Iraq, Iraqis came forward to say how terrible it had been to live in a society where saying anything negative about Saddam could have fatal consequences, and that therefore they were careful, even before their own children, to never to speak too freely. Alaska is not Iraq, of course, but I am sure there are people in Alaska who likewise are afraid to say what they know about the Palins and who dissemble in front of their children, lest loose lips lead to horrible consequences.

Considering what I know about Sarah Palin I have NO problem with the Professor comparing her to Saddam Hussein, if we are talking about the heavy handed way they treat their subordinates and the fear that Palin was instilled in a handful of people living in Wasilla. But I must reiterate that I have NO evidence that either Todd or Sarah did anybody any physical harm.

Cause them to be fired, or damage their reputations? Yes. Cause them to lose their lives or suffer significant injury? No.

Having made that one point, I direct you to click the link and read the rest of this interesting back and forth conversation.  You might even see a name or two that you recognize.

Good Morning America's Robin Roberts has a request before her big interview with Bristol Palin tomorrow morning.

From Robin Roberts Twitter account:

Happy Weekend! I'm talking w/ Bristol Palin tmrw about her new book. Interview will air Mon on @GMA. Do you have any questions for Bristol?
19 hours ago via Twitter for BlackBerry®

Well gang I don't know about you but I think we should oblige Ms. Roberts.

This is what I sent:

@RobinRoberts @GMA Yes ask her to clarify her statement that Levi got her drunk and stole her virginity.
3 hours ago via web

I would REALLY like for Bristol to continue making this accusation against Levi, until he gets pissed off enough to finally fight back.

If you have any ideas for questions, please click the link at the top and let this "journalist" know what she SHOULD be asking this lying Palin progeny.

Journalist Sarah Jones bravely delves into the world of the "Quiverfull Movement."

Vyckie Garrison ex-Quiverfull member

Courtesy of Politicususa:

Sarah Jones: Can you define “Quiverfull movement” and what you’ve identified as the patriarchal beliefs behind it?

Vyckie Garrison: I like to define Quiverfull as a very powerful head trip. It’s an all-encompassing vision of a big, happy family which infects the mind and affects every aspect of a Believer’s life. The term “Quiverfull” comes from a reference in Psalm 127 which likens children to “arrows” in the hands of a mighty man, “blessed is the man who has his quiver full of them.”

Quiverfull Believers eschew all forms of birth control in favor of “trusting the Lord” with their family planning. The Quiverfull ideal embraces a “biblical” model (read, fundamentalist) of the traditional family which insists that the husband is the head of the household and the wife is the submissive “helpmeet.”

Sarah Jones: How do those beliefs manifest for wives and female children? Can you give us some examples of expectations of wives and daughters that might surprise our readers?

Vyckie Garrison: In practice, the Quiverfull ideals often result in larger-than-average families (think, Jim Bob & Michelle Duggar of TLCs “19 & Counting” fame) in which the woman stays at home having babies, homeschooling, homesteading, dressing “modestly,” and most importantly, serving and submitting to her “lord,” i.e., her patriarchal husband.

The Quiverfull lifestyle is extremely demanding and the only way a woman can hope to succeed is to rely heavily on her older daughters. It is expected that a Quiverfull daughter will be fully capable of running the household, including all meal-preparation, laundry duties, child care and homeschooling of younger siblings by the age of twelve. Many girls are doing all this by the time they’re eight or ten because their mothers are so consumed with birthing more and more “arrows” to fill the quivers of their husbands.

A Quiverfull daughter is taught from a young age that her purpose in life is to serve the man whom God has placed in authority over her. She serves her father while she lives at home (she does this primarily by assisting her mother in domestic duties and child care). She absolutely must remain a virgin and is taught to expect to meet and marry her future husband through a father-led match-making process called “courtship.” Her education is geared toward developing domestic skills ~ college is generally considered unnecessary and even dangerous for her spiritual well-being.

Sarah Jones: Do Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann (both of whom share a belief in the bible replacing the constitution; i.e., a theocratic takeover of the American government) represent the beliefs you were taught and if so, how? If not, why?

Vyckie Garrison: When I was a fully-convinced Quiverfull believer, I did question how Sarah Palin could justify her political activities so long as she had children still living at home. I also thought it ironic that, according to the ideals she espouses, women should not hold authority over men, or even be allowed to vote for that matter.

Still, I supported Palin because she understands and promotes conservative Christian “family values.” I was especially impressed by her convictions with regard to “taking back America for God” — in my Quiverfull-colored opinion, Sarah Palin “got it.” Meaning, of course, that she has a decent understanding of Dominionist principles and she has a plan to lead America toward a “truly Biblical” (read, theocratic) society.

This philosophy of breeding for God is as old as religion itself. Older even.

It dates back to a time when the only hope that a community had of survival was to have more warriors, and more people working to support those warriors, than their enemies had at their disposal.

One of the main fears that Christians, even today, have is that the Muslims are out breeding them, and that ultimately they will lose their religious dominance and power structure. By the way that is the same fear that the White Power people have concerning Hispanics, Asians, and African Americans. And yes, the two ARE tied together.

I am still constantly amazed how Sarah Palin is able to gain the support from these hyper Fundamentalists when her entire lifestyle is an affront to the tenets of their belief system. It seems that essentially these people are bred to accept the lies told to them by their leaders, and therefore give her a free pass.

Please do click the link at the top and read this entire interview.  Though it is very troubling, it provides important information to help us understand where the Republican party keeps finding their supporters.

Laura Novak continues to educate MSM reporters about REAL journalism. This week she attempts to do that with the ADN. Yeah good luck with that, Laura!

From Laura's blog:

In the past month, I have attempted eight times to talk to the reporters, writers and editors at the Anchorage Daily News about the paper’s coverage of Trig Palin’s maternity.

I was shut down or refused 7 times. The other effort resulted in an off-the-record phone call. In all cases, the party-line was toed: The editors and reporters are “intelligent” and they thoroughly investigated claims that the then-governor did not give birth to Trig Palin. And they came away satisfied that she, in fact, did so.

What was it specifically that allowed them to arrive at that conclusion?

No one said, other than the fact that reporter Lisa Demer talked to Mrs. Palin’s doctor, Cathy Baldwin-Johnson and it was “clear” that it was Mrs. Palin’s baby. And that to suggest otherwise is “ridiculous.”

Collectively, the answer was that to pursue this matter was akin to the Obama birth certificate conspiracy theories and that people are simply going to believe what they are going to believe.

All right, then tell me what Dr. Baldwin-Johnson said and I’ll believe you.

But by then, the answers to my inquiry were getting shorter and decidedly snippier.

So I searched – again - for a story that the Daily News might have written that I might have missed that might have made it all “clear.” And I couldn’t find one.

Laura Novak does the best she can with what essentially makes little, or no, sense.

Go ahead and read the rest of the article, and then come back and tell us what you think is the reason that the ADN did such an incredibly poor job of following up on a story that could have meant a Pulitzer Prize for the journalsit who broke it on the national stage.

The Washington Post responds to my offer to help look through Palin's e-mails. Update!

I just now received this in my e-mail account.

Hello from the Washington Post newsroom,

We have had a strong response to our initial call-out on the Palin e-mails. And as a result, we've decided to ask you and everyone else who responded to our initial call-out to post comments, questions, and information related to the e-mails directly to comment threads on The Fix: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix

Starting this afternoon, we’ll be posting digital versions of the Palin emails here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/palinemails

So, once they begin to appear, we invite you to:

1. Browse the emails.
2. Read what other users have posted about them in the comments of The Fix blog. Take note of what has already has been pointed out.
3. If you find something new, interesting, and noteworthy, post a comment on The Fix blog under the embedded documents. Include specifics in your comment: page numbers, direct excerpts, etc.
4. Discuss what others have found by replying to their comments.

Our producers and reporters will have an eye on the comment streams as they read and report the emails alongside you. We may contact you for further details, by way of your registered e-mail with The Post (not necessarily the address this e-mail is being sent to). If you would not like to be contacted using your registered e-mail address, please specify that with your comments.

Of course this is not news to all of us who were reading the Post yesterday, but I figured I would share with you their official response, which I am sure everybody who volunteered received as well.

So folks it looks like we have a busy day ahead of us, and in anticipation I have cleared my calendar, fired up my Mr. Coffee, and prepared to spend the day sorting through this massive, and way overdue, e-mail dump.

Personally I will be checking in with the Washington Post throughout the day as well as doing my own searches over at Crivella West, and putting together my own posts based on what I come up with.

Your help in the comments section is, of course, more than welcome.

If you DO find something blogworthy, PLEASE make sure to send the link.

Hmm, I wonder HOW Sarah Palin will be spending her day today?

Pouting?

Throwing cans at her  new Arizona refrigerator?

Getting ready to have a Facebook post written for her portraying her as the victim of her own e-mails?

Well though I may not know exactly what she will be doing, I am fairly certain what the expression on her face will be all day.

Oh yeah!  No doubt about it.

Update: While we are waiting here is a PDF, courtesy of MSNBC, of the documents that list all of the redacted emails and the reason they were redacted.

Update2: Here is the first of the e-mails that are NOT completely redacted in a Washington Post PDF. Currently they only go to February 20, 2007.