""" Lord Nelson Simon said... Of course Jesse has to have the last word. This guy must have a small you-know-what. This is the kind of person who argues based on empty words and has to have the last word. He is a fraud just like Palin. He is an ass.
You don't belong here Jessie. You have already been given too much time and space. You offer no valid arguments or credible information. Absolutely nothing. You offer no proof that Palin WAS pregnant with Trig. If you have proof come back, otherwise go away."""
I have presented the proof. However, such evidence is meaningless to you, a true believer. There is no real proof you can ever see to change your opinion. I have only asked for one of three things: expert testimony from doctors, eyewitnesses to a conspiracy, or documents indicating a cover up.
Can anyone here provide this information? With all the boasting that is tossed around here, it should be a simple enough matter.
God Jessie you are just dense-thick as a brick. I don't mean to be rude but it is like talking to a rock. And whoever said you had to have the last word is right! If all of us came on your blog and repeated the same dense statements over and over, we would be kicked off. You have provided no evidence of Tris parentage and either has Sarah. She has provided nothing just lime you. Please go away. You have had you fifteen minutes and you have proven nothing except that you are a tick headed Palinbot. It would be so easy for Sarah to stop this talk and prove Trig was hers but she doesn't. That speaks volumes just go away-your comments are empty just like Scarahs.
Mr. Jesse, Have you even LOOKED at the CBJ letter? You would have to be blind to not see it is faked. It is an absolute mess. That is really not one would expect from a "medical report."
Bristol Palin is busy with her tireless work and sacrifice for her campaign against teen pregnancy. Who saed that abstinance isn't fun? The girl is working two jobs, how many can claim that?
I can believe a bad doctor would sign off on a fake looking document. What we can see it that it is suspicious, they did a real bad job that it needs to be INVESTIGATED FOR SURE.
It is time to send some love to Oprah. Not because she will prove anything, she might find something for another show. This first one is to cover what Sarah says in one book. I don't know if she brought up the campaign or the last minute medical letter.
Since the medical letter from Dr. Baldwin-Johnson is continually questioned and no one from Palin land can prove it is authentic or true either.
Why not give Oprah more information about why it is questioned and why investigating this piece of women's history is imperitive.
""" Anonymous said... I can believe a bad doctor would sign off on a fake looking document. What we can see it that it is suspicious, they did a real bad job that it needs to be INVESTIGATED FOR SURE.
It is time to send some love to Oprah. Not because she will prove anything, she might find something for another show. This first one is to cover what Sarah says in one book. I don't know if she brought up the campaign or the last minute medical letter.
Since the medical letter from Dr. Baldwin-Johnson is continually questioned and no one from Palin land can prove it is authentic or true either.
Why not give Oprah more information about why it is questioned and why investigating this piece of women's history is imperitive."""
She is a bad doctor? Based on what estimate? You know the letter is a forgery? Based on what evidence? Whose expert testimony did you obtain?
Sarah Palin has already proven the authenticity of the letter. It has been vetted by the press, who are no friends of the Governor. It is up to you to prove that letter is false, beyond a shadow of doubt. You have yet to do that.
For any dope that thinks I am giving "expert analysis" that is not what is happening. This is not about "expert analysis."
I'm more about questioning authority. I didn't mean to imply it is only Oprah that should have more information. I am interested in further investigation, questioning, Oprah is merely one interesting party. I have questions about a historical document. It happens all the time.
No one has to agree. I think Dr. Baldwin-Johnson is bad for reasons I won't say here. It is better to bring up in a more private forum or request.
There is no purpose in a discussion with someone who can't first show that they have even the slightest clue about what some people are saying about Dr. Baldwin-Johnson.
I know people that think Dr. Baldwin-Johnson is "wonderful" because of her outward appearances. I know nice things about her, too, also.
But that is not all and this isn't the time for proving anything. Right now it is time to write to Oprah.
@Jesse, the letter was never vetted by the press. Palin hid it from the press until the last possible moment. What is Sarah Palin hiding? Why is she in hiding now?
""" Anonymous said... @Jesse, please answer: why did Sarah Palin quit her elected position as governor in the middle of her term?"""
Perhaps you should try listening to the woman yourself. She told you why.
""" Anonymous said... @Jesse, the letter was never vetted by the press. Palin hid it from the press until the last possible moment. What is Sarah Palin hiding? Why is she in hiding now?"""
The press will determine the authenticity of anything a campaign might release, even if it is released at the last minute. That's their job.
""" Anonymous said... For any dope that thinks I am giving "expert analysis" that is not what is happening. This is not about "expert analysis."
I'm more about questioning authority. I didn't mean to imply it is only Oprah that should have more information. I am interested in further investigation, questioning, Oprah is merely one interesting party. I have questions about a historical document. It happens all the time.
No one has to agree. I think Dr. Baldwin-Johnson is bad for reasons I won't say here. It is better to bring up in a more private forum or request.
There is no purpose in a discussion with someone who can't first show that they have even the slightest clue about what some people are saying about Dr. Baldwin-Johnson.
I know people that think Dr. Baldwin-Johnson is "wonderful" because of her outward appearances. I know nice things about her, too, also.
But that is not all and this isn't the time for proving anything. Right now it is time to write to Oprah."""
If you think the letter was forged or otherwise falsified, then get an expert in document analysis and have him determine if the document is a forgery. If you are going to ask questions then you had better be prepared to follow through on them.
@Jesse, please give us direct quotes with links on how the "CBJ letter" about Palin's medical records, released on election eve by Sarah Palin's staff when it was too late to vet, was vetted by the press.
""" Anonymous said... Jesse, you can't answer why Palin quit! That is hilarious! No one can make sense of Sarah's word salad, not even poor Jesse!"""
I don't need to speak for Sarah Palin. She's more than capable of doing so herself. If you are incapable of understanding her, then that is a fault with your own comprehension, not mine.
""" Anonymous said... @Jesse, why do you support a pop culture figure whose actions you do not understand and cannot explain to others? As an advocate, you are failing."""
What actions are those? Can you be more specific?
""" Anonymous said... @Jesse, please give us direct quotes with links on how the "CBJ letter" about Palin's medical records, released on election eve by Sarah Palin's staff when it was too late to vet, was vetted by the press."""
The fact that it was released infers that it was vetted. You are going nowhere with trying to prove the letter was forged. It is an assumption simply not proven by the evidence at hand.
""" Helen said... It's funny, but it seems like all that JC's presence ended up doing here was mobilizing people into action.
"The fact that it was released infers it was vetted."
By whom? The McCain campaign? That's why they didn't release it until it was too late. It was never vetted by the press. I do not have to prove anything. You are the one who cannot provide proof of what YOU say. Give us the proof it was vetted; inferences are not proof and it is illogical to say it is.
If Jesse is paid by the post, he is really wasting Sarah's $$, as he is unable to advocate for her in any way. He is hurting Sarah Palin's brand with his nonsense.
"The fact that it was released infers it was vetted."
By whom? The McCain campaign? That's why they didn't release it until it was too late. It was never vetted by the press. I do not have to prove anything. You are the one who cannot provide proof of what YOU say. Give us the proof it was vetted; inferences are not proof and it is illogical to say it is.
Paid by the post?"""
You seem to know nothing of logical. You can go on ad nauseum about how the letter is suspicous, but that doesn't make it a forgery. It was released by the McCain campaign to all the major media outlets. The press has no interest in releasing a forged document and hurting their credibility, so they would do some basic scrutiny to determine its legitmacy. It is the same way with other stories. For example, Obama's note from his doctor. The fact that it was released by the press to the people guarantees a level of authenticity to that note.
The burden of proof is on you to prove the Sarah Palin letter is a forgery. Do not think you can shift the burden of proof. I know that game too well. You have yet to even prove your original claim. Come back with expert, analysis of the letter in question, and we'll talk.
I don't think he is on any page if he is thinking suspicious means "that doesn't make it a forgery." Suspicious: inclined to suspect, esp. inclined to suspect evil; distrustful.
It is suspect, not a proven fact. It can be suspect for things other than a suspicious signature.
He is pretending the press and John McCain vet everything. When it comes to Obama he pretends "a level of authenticity." LOL!!!! "The fact that it was released by the press to the people guarantees a level of authenticity to that note."
The dude is going for some laughs. He is a double agent. Wants Palin and her peeps to look like clowns. It worked. LOL.
""" Anonymous said... That dude is in lala or LOL land.
I don't think he is on any page if he is thinking suspicious means "that doesn't make it a forgery." Suspicious: inclined to suspect, esp. inclined to suspect evil; distrustful.
It is suspect, not a proven fact. It can be suspect for things other than a suspicious signature.
He is pretending the press and John McCain vet everything. When it comes to Obama he pretends "a level of authenticity." LOL!!!! "The fact that it was released by the press to the people guarantees a level of authenticity to that note."
The dude is going for some laughs. He is a double agent. Wants Palin and her peeps to look like clowns. It worked. LOL."""
Quite frankly, the level of cognitive dissonance here is unsurprising. It is not to be unexpected from conspiracy theorists who believe any half-baked tale that happens to emerge from the sewers of gossip.
The press went over both the letters from both Obama's and Palin's doctors. They both were quickly verified as accurate, hence the reason no questions about their legitmacy.
What you people would presuppose is that Sarah Palin (or her cohorts)released a forged letter and then silenced her doctor. Now the question I would ask is, what evidence is there for this?
The basic journalistic process ensures some level of vetting in every news story. It is the process of gathering data, determining its truthfulness, and then releasing the story to the public at large. It is the same method used throughout the press in order to provide the most accurate information to the public. Does the media live up to that standard all the time? No. However, this is not one of those times.
You are not going to disprove an official medical letter from a doctor with nothing more than a possible clerical error made by a person who is not an expert in Microsoft Word.
Really, if this is the best you folks have, then truly I am laughing. You'll slowly grow insane as you soon realize your fantasy never had a basis in reality, or you'll wise up and realize you were fooled from the start by a bunch con artists, or malicious bloggers to be exact.
From Andrew Sullivan on 11/3/08: Palin's Medical Records: The Bitter End
"Are you as unsurprised as I am? Two months of begging from this blog and nada. We all know why: Two weeks ago, Palin’s campaign told several reporters traveling with the campaign that a summary of the governor’s medical history would be made public before election day. Reporters were told that details on Palin’s medical background would be released early last week. Last Thursday, after that timeframe had passed, a campaign aide backed off the previous pledge, saying the campaign wasn’t sure when the information would be released. John McCain, Barack Obama and Joseph Biden have all provided details about their medical history. But anyone who has any questions is 'insane.'"
"The fact that it was released by the press to the people guarantees a level of authenticity to that note."
Might I direct your attention to Dan Rather and the famed Killian documents? Your presumption of journalistic infallibility is both naive and thoroughly unconventional for a self-professed conservative, albeit one beset by melancholy. I had no idea you were such a fan of the liberal media elite, but your allegiance is certainly more than welcome.
“Quite frankly, the level of cognitive dissonance here is unsurprising.”
Right you are, sir. Indeed, I too sense a palpably and profoundly irrational attachment to ideas which one has themselves deeply invested. I’m often struck by the degree to which Mrs. Palin’s admirers resemble those of Marian Keech. I hope your fealty has been acknowledged.
Finally, a word on grammar and spelling. In the haste of emotionally charged, rapid fire blogging, typos are frequent. You seem an affable gentleman, and I suspect we agree on the childishness of impugning an individual’s intellect on such grounds. At the risk of presumptuousness, I hope I speak for everyone here in apologizing for the repeated misspellings of your name. That said, the correct spelling is B-E-L-I-E-V-E*.
“Why should I devote my blog time to something already thoroughly debunked?”
Why, indeed! Pray tell, why are you here? Your efforts are clearly for naught. I’m perplexed that one who inhabits and enjoys the virtual circle jerk that is the Palin web ring would spend their valuable time in conflict with individuals you’re so unlikely to persuade.
“I came here to make a declaration and ask a question.”
Ohhh, well then that makes perfect sense. Except, how's that working out thus far?*
“Confident enough to use my real name.”
Given that two of your most vile cohorts think it acceptable to investigate, harass, intimidate and expose those with whom they disagree, it is entirely reasonable that no one publish sans anonymity.
What ethical system allows you to affirm such ignominious, dishonorable and thoroughly un-American tactics?
Finally, care to explain how a FIFE-PAC contributing, Ron Paul republican lobbies on behalf of Mrs. Palin’s debt producing, anti-free market policies? I’m stumped.
Keep up the good work. No pun intended.
*Impotent (Adj.): without force or effectiveness; unable to attain or sustain a penile erection
"The fact that it was released by the press to the people guarantees a level of authenticity to that note."
Might I direct your attention to Dan Rather and the famed Killian documents? Your presumption of journalistic infallibility is both naive and thoroughly unconventional for a self-professed conservative, albeit one beset by melancholy. I had no idea you were such a fan of the liberal media elite, but your allegiance is certainly more than welcome.
“Quite frankly, the level of cognitive dissonance here is unsurprising.”
Right you are, sir. Indeed, I too sense a palpably and profoundly irrational attachment to ideas which one has themselves deeply invested. I’m often struck by the degree to which Mrs. Palin’s admirers resemble those of Marian Keech. I hope your fealty has been acknowledged.
Finally, a word on grammar and spelling. In the haste of emotionally charged, rapid fire blogging, typos are frequent. You seem an affable gentleman, and I suspect we agree on the childishness of impugning an individual’s intellect on such grounds. At the risk of presumptuousness, I hope I speak for everyone here in apologizing for the repeated misspellings of your name. That said, the correct spelling is B-E-L-I-E-V-E*.
Wishing you a pleasant day.
*Remember, I before E accept after C."""
A game hen! Not unlike a Cornish hen. Yet that is besides the point.
Yes, I am well aware of the small incident concerning Dan Rather. I was paying attention at the time.
You mention the example as a method to demonstrate the media is not always trustworthy, and that documents can be forged. You could also use this untimely profession of foolishness on CBS' part to say that bloggers can make a big difference in exposing lies. And yes, you would be right.
So go ahead, expose the document as false like the bloggers did in 2004. The mainstream media outlets quickly followed with their expert analysis then, and they would do so now. Conclusively prove that it is a falsification, a forgery. Bring in the experts to analyze it. Otherwise you have nothing but conjecture.
I'm waiting.
""" Game Hen, Part Deux said... Mr. Cornish,
“Why should I devote my blog time to something already thoroughly debunked?”
Why, indeed! Pray tell, why are you here? Your efforts are clearly for naught. I’m perplexed that one who inhabits and enjoys the virtual circle jerk that is the Palin web ring would spend their valuable time in conflict with individuals you’re so unlikely to persuade.
“I came here to make a declaration and ask a question.”
Ohhh, well then that makes perfect sense. Except, how's that working out thus far?*
“Confident enough to use my real name.”
Given that two of your most vile cohorts think it acceptable to investigate, harass, intimidate and expose those with whom they disagree, it is entirely reasonable that no one publish sans anonymity.
What ethical system allows you to affirm such ignominious, dishonorable and thoroughly un-American tactics?
Finally, care to explain how a FIFE-PAC contributing, Ron Paul republican lobbies on behalf of Mrs. Palin’s debt producing, anti-free market policies? I’m stumped.
Keep up the good work. No pun intended.
*Impotent (Adj.): without force or effectiveness; unable to attain or sustain a penile erection"""
So afraid of Dan Riehl and R.S. McCain? Your trepidation is so thoroughly confounding, but revealing. Only the miscreants and vagabonds of the blogger world should feel any semblance of fear from them.
To be very clear, Mr. Cornish, I expressed neither fear and trepidation, only revulsion. The desire to comment anonymously does not make one a miscreant or vagabond.
"""Given that two of your most vile cohorts think it acceptable to investigate, harass, intimidate and expose those with whom they disagree, it is entirely reasonable that no one publish sans anonymity. """
Then why state this?
"""Given that two of your most vile cohorts think it acceptable to investigate, harass, intimidate and expose those with whom they disagree, it is entirely reasonable that no one publish sans anonymity. """
.
236 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 236 of 236""" Lord Nelson Simon said...
Of course Jesse has to have the last word. This guy must have a small you-know-what. This is the kind of person who argues based on empty words and has to have the last word. He is a fraud just like Palin. He is an ass.
You don't belong here Jessie. You have already been given too much time and space. You offer no valid arguments or credible information. Absolutely nothing. You offer no proof that Palin WAS pregnant with Trig. If you have proof come back, otherwise go away."""
I have presented the proof. However, such evidence is meaningless to you, a true believer. There is no real proof you can ever see to change your opinion. I have only asked for one of three things: expert testimony from doctors, eyewitnesses to a conspiracy, or documents indicating a cover up.
Can anyone here provide this information? With all the boasting that is tossed around here, it should be a simple enough matter.
Jesse, you provided nothing but logical fallacies. Prove she was pregnant. We have been awaiting your proof for days! Please show us your proof!
And why did she quit her elected position halfway through her term? Thanks.
God Jessie you are just dense-thick as a brick. I don't mean to be rude but it is like talking to a rock. And whoever said you had to have the last word is right! If all of us came on your blog and repeated the same dense statements over and over, we would be kicked off.
You have provided no evidence of Tris parentage and either has Sarah. She has provided nothing just lime you.
Please go away. You have had you fifteen minutes and you have proven nothing except that you are a tick headed Palinbot. It would be so easy for Sarah to stop this talk and prove Trig was hers but she doesn't. That speaks volumes just go away-your comments are empty just like Scarahs.
Mr. Jesse, Have you even LOOKED at the CBJ letter? You would have to be blind to not see it is faked. It is an absolute mess. That is really not one would expect from a "medical report."
It can take a long time for things to progress. We all want this to be scrutinized by medical boards and in the courtroom.
Dr Michael Kamrava expelled
Bristol Palin is busy with her tireless work and sacrifice for her campaign against teen pregnancy. Who saed that abstinance isn't fun?
The girl is working two jobs, how many can claim that?
The letter isn't fake. The doctor has signed it, rendering it authentic.
I'm waiting for your team of experts to prove the letter was forged.
Jesse, Isn't Bristol wonderful? Caring for her little family, being the activist for abstinance and holding down two jobs?
She proves all there is about Sarah being right about abstinance only. Those evil libs are trying to say it hasn't worked.
I can believe a bad doctor would sign off on a fake looking document. What we can see it that it is suspicious, they did a real bad job that it needs to be INVESTIGATED FOR SURE.
It is time to send some love to Oprah. Not because she will prove anything, she might find something for another show. This first one is to cover what Sarah says in one book. I don't know if she brought up the campaign or the last minute medical letter.
Since the medical letter from Dr. Baldwin-Johnson is continually questioned and no one from Palin land can prove it is authentic or true either.
Why not give Oprah more information about why it is questioned and why investigating this piece of women's history is imperitive.
""" Anonymous said...
I can believe a bad doctor would sign off on a fake looking document. What we can see it that it is suspicious, they did a real bad job that it needs to be INVESTIGATED FOR SURE.
It is time to send some love to Oprah. Not because she will prove anything, she might find something for another show. This first one is to cover what Sarah says in one book. I don't know if she brought up the campaign or the last minute medical letter.
Since the medical letter from Dr. Baldwin-Johnson is continually questioned and no one from Palin land can prove it is authentic or true either.
Why not give Oprah more information about why it is questioned and why investigating this piece of women's history is imperitive."""
She is a bad doctor? Based on what estimate? You know the letter is a forgery? Based on what evidence? Whose expert testimony did you obtain?
Sarah Palin has already proven the authenticity of the letter. It has been vetted by the press, who are no friends of the Governor. It is up to you to prove that letter is false, beyond a shadow of doubt. You have yet to do that.
Your "expert analysis" doesn't count, either.
For any dope that thinks I am giving "expert analysis" that is not what is happening. This is not about "expert analysis."
I'm more about questioning authority. I didn't mean to imply it is only Oprah that should have more information. I am interested in further investigation, questioning, Oprah is merely one interesting party. I have questions about a historical document. It happens all the time.
No one has to agree. I think Dr. Baldwin-Johnson is bad for reasons I won't say here. It is better to bring up in a more private forum or request.
There is no purpose in a discussion with someone who can't first show that they have even the slightest clue about what some people are saying about Dr. Baldwin-Johnson.
I know people that think Dr. Baldwin-Johnson is "wonderful" because of her outward appearances. I know nice things about her, too, also.
But that is not all and this isn't the time for proving anything. Right now it is time to write to Oprah.
@Jesse, please answer: why did Sarah Palin quit her elected position as governor in the middle of her term?
@Jesse, the letter was never vetted by the press. Palin hid it from the press until the last possible moment.
What is Sarah Palin hiding? Why is she in hiding now?
""" Anonymous said...
@Jesse, please answer: why did Sarah Palin quit her elected position as governor in the middle of her term?"""
Perhaps you should try listening to the woman yourself. She told you why.
""" Anonymous said...
@Jesse, the letter was never vetted by the press. Palin hid it from the press until the last possible moment.
What is Sarah Palin hiding? Why is she in hiding now?"""
The press will determine the authenticity of anything a campaign might release, even if it is released at the last minute. That's their job.
""" Anonymous said...
For any dope that thinks I am giving "expert analysis" that is not what is happening. This is not about "expert analysis."
I'm more about questioning authority. I didn't mean to imply it is only Oprah that should have more information. I am interested in further investigation, questioning, Oprah is merely one interesting party. I have questions about a historical document. It happens all the time.
No one has to agree. I think Dr. Baldwin-Johnson is bad for reasons I won't say here. It is better to bring up in a more private forum or request.
There is no purpose in a discussion with someone who can't first show that they have even the slightest clue about what some people are saying about Dr. Baldwin-Johnson.
I know people that think Dr. Baldwin-Johnson is "wonderful" because of her outward appearances. I know nice things about her, too, also.
But that is not all and this isn't the time for proving anything. Right now it is time to write to Oprah."""
If you think the letter was forged or otherwise falsified, then get an expert in document analysis and have him determine if the document is a forgery. If you are going to ask questions then you had better be prepared to follow through on them.
Follow through by asking more questions until the answers are solid.
Jesse, you can't answer why Palin quit! That is hilarious! No one can make sense of Sarah's word salad, not even poor Jesse!
@Jesse, please give us direct quotes with links on how the "CBJ letter" about Palin's medical records, released on election eve by Sarah Palin's staff when it was too late to vet, was vetted by the press.
@Jesse, why do you support a pop culture figure whose actions you do not understand and cannot explain to others? As an advocate, you are failing.
""" Anonymous said...
Jesse, you can't answer why Palin quit! That is hilarious! No one can make sense of Sarah's word salad, not even poor Jesse!"""
I don't need to speak for Sarah Palin. She's more than capable of doing so herself. If you are incapable of understanding her, then that is a fault with your own comprehension, not mine.
""" Anonymous said...
@Jesse, why do you support a pop culture figure whose actions you do not understand and cannot explain to others? As an advocate, you are failing."""
What actions are those? Can you be more specific?
""" Anonymous said...
@Jesse, please give us direct quotes with links on how the "CBJ letter" about Palin's medical records, released on election eve by Sarah Palin's staff when it was too late to vet, was vetted by the press."""
The fact that it was released infers that it was vetted. You are going nowhere with trying to prove the letter was forged. It is an assumption simply not proven by the evidence at hand.
""" Helen said...
It's funny, but it seems like all that JC's presence ended up doing here was mobilizing people into action.
Way to go Jesse!"""
For what purpose, exactly?
Jesse:
"The fact that it was released infers it was vetted."
By whom? The McCain campaign? That's why they didn't release it until it was too late. It was never vetted by the press. I do not have to prove anything. You are the one who cannot provide proof of what YOU say. Give us the proof it was vetted; inferences are not proof and it is illogical to say it is.
Paid by the post?
If Jesse is paid by the post, he is really wasting Sarah's $$, as he is unable to advocate for her in any way. He is hurting Sarah Palin's brand with his nonsense.
That dude could be a double agent. They join a Palin group to destroy the Repubs from the inside out.
""" Anonymous said...
Jesse:
"The fact that it was released infers it was vetted."
By whom? The McCain campaign? That's why they didn't release it until it was too late. It was never vetted by the press. I do not have to prove anything. You are the one who cannot provide proof of what YOU say. Give us the proof it was vetted; inferences are not proof and it is illogical to say it is.
Paid by the post?"""
You seem to know nothing of logical. You can go on ad nauseum about how the letter is suspicous, but that doesn't make it a forgery. It was released by the McCain campaign to all the major media outlets. The press has no interest in releasing a forged document and hurting their credibility, so they would do some basic scrutiny to determine its legitmacy. It is the same way with other stories. For example, Obama's note from his doctor. The fact that it was released by the press to the people guarantees a level of authenticity to that note.
The burden of proof is on you to prove the Sarah Palin letter is a forgery. Do not think you can shift the burden of proof. I know that game too well. You have yet to even prove your original claim. Come back with expert, analysis of the letter in question, and we'll talk.
That dude is in lala or LOL land.
I don't think he is on any page if he is thinking suspicious means "that doesn't make it a forgery."
Suspicious: inclined to suspect, esp. inclined to suspect evil; distrustful.
It is suspect, not a proven fact. It can be suspect for things other than a suspicious signature.
He is pretending the press and John McCain vet everything. When it comes to Obama he pretends "a level of authenticity."
LOL!!!! "The fact that it was released by the press to the people guarantees a level of authenticity to that note."
The dude is going for some laughs. He is a double agent. Wants Palin and her peeps to look like clowns. It worked. LOL.
Seriously, Jesse: Do you work for Mitt Romney?
""" Anonymous said...
That dude is in lala or LOL land.
I don't think he is on any page if he is thinking suspicious means "that doesn't make it a forgery."
Suspicious: inclined to suspect, esp. inclined to suspect evil; distrustful.
It is suspect, not a proven fact. It can be suspect for things other than a suspicious signature.
He is pretending the press and John McCain vet everything. When it comes to Obama he pretends "a level of authenticity."
LOL!!!! "The fact that it was released by the press to the people guarantees a level of authenticity to that note."
The dude is going for some laughs. He is a double agent. Wants Palin and her peeps to look like clowns. It worked. LOL."""
Quite frankly, the level of cognitive dissonance here is unsurprising. It is not to be unexpected from conspiracy theorists who believe any half-baked tale that happens to emerge from the sewers of gossip.
The press went over both the letters from both Obama's and Palin's doctors. They both were quickly verified as accurate, hence the reason no questions about their legitmacy.
What you people would presuppose is that Sarah Palin (or her cohorts)released a forged letter and then silenced her doctor. Now the question I would ask is, what evidence is there for this?
The basic journalistic process ensures some level of vetting in every news story. It is the process of gathering data, determining its truthfulness, and then releasing the story to the public at large. It is the same method used throughout the press in order to provide the most accurate information to the public. Does the media live up to that standard all the time? No. However, this is not one of those times.
You are not going to disprove an official medical letter from a doctor with nothing more than a possible clerical error made by a person who is not an expert in Microsoft Word.
Really, if this is the best you folks have, then truly I am laughing. You'll slowly grow insane as you soon realize your fantasy never had a basis in reality, or you'll wise up and realize you were fooled from the start by a bunch con artists, or malicious bloggers to be exact.
Jesse, do you work for Mitt Romney?
From Andrew Sullivan on 11/3/08: Palin's Medical Records: The Bitter End
"Are you as unsurprised as I am? Two months of begging from this blog and nada. We all know why:
Two weeks ago, Palin’s campaign told several reporters traveling with the campaign that a summary of the governor’s medical history would be made public before election day.
Reporters were told that details on Palin’s medical background would be released early last week. Last Thursday, after that timeframe had passed, a campaign aide backed off the previous pledge, saying the campaign wasn’t sure when the information would be released.
John McCain, Barack Obama and Joseph Biden have all provided details about their medical history.
But anyone who has any questions is 'insane.'"
Proof that Palin was just a cheap tease.
Mr. Cornish,
"The fact that it was released by the press to the people guarantees a level of authenticity to that note."
Might I direct your attention to Dan Rather and the famed Killian documents? Your presumption of journalistic infallibility is both naive and thoroughly unconventional for a self-professed conservative, albeit one beset by melancholy. I had no idea you were such a fan of the liberal media elite, but your allegiance is certainly more than welcome.
“Quite frankly, the level of cognitive dissonance here is unsurprising.”
Right you are, sir. Indeed, I too sense a palpably and profoundly irrational attachment to ideas which one has themselves deeply invested. I’m often struck by the degree to which Mrs. Palin’s admirers resemble those of Marian Keech. I hope your fealty has been acknowledged.
Finally, a word on grammar and spelling. In the haste of emotionally charged, rapid fire blogging, typos are frequent. You seem an affable gentleman, and I suspect we agree on the childishness of impugning an individual’s intellect on such grounds. At the risk of presumptuousness, I hope I speak for everyone here in apologizing for the repeated misspellings of your name. That said, the correct spelling is B-E-L-I-E-V-E*.
Wishing you a pleasant day.
*Remember, I before E accept after C.
Mr. Cornish,
“Why should I devote my blog time to something already thoroughly debunked?”
Why, indeed! Pray tell, why are you here? Your efforts are clearly for naught. I’m perplexed that one who inhabits and enjoys the virtual circle jerk that is the Palin web ring would spend their valuable time in conflict with individuals you’re so unlikely to persuade.
“I came here to make a declaration and ask a question.”
Ohhh, well then that makes perfect sense. Except, how's that working out thus far?*
“Confident enough to use my real name.”
Given that two of your most vile cohorts think it acceptable to investigate, harass, intimidate and expose those with whom they disagree, it is entirely reasonable that no one publish sans anonymity.
What ethical system allows you to affirm such ignominious, dishonorable and thoroughly un-American tactics?
Finally, care to explain how a FIFE-PAC contributing, Ron Paul republican lobbies on behalf of Mrs. Palin’s debt producing, anti-free market policies? I’m stumped.
Keep up the good work. No pun intended.
*Impotent (Adj.): without force or effectiveness; unable to attain or sustain a penile erection
""" Game Hen said...
Mr. Cornish,
"The fact that it was released by the press to the people guarantees a level of authenticity to that note."
Might I direct your attention to Dan Rather and the famed Killian documents? Your presumption of journalistic infallibility is both naive and thoroughly unconventional for a self-professed conservative, albeit one beset by melancholy. I had no idea you were such a fan of the liberal media elite, but your allegiance is certainly more than welcome.
“Quite frankly, the level of cognitive dissonance here is unsurprising.”
Right you are, sir. Indeed, I too sense a palpably and profoundly irrational attachment to ideas which one has themselves deeply invested. I’m often struck by the degree to which Mrs. Palin’s admirers resemble those of Marian Keech. I hope your fealty has been acknowledged.
Finally, a word on grammar and spelling. In the haste of emotionally charged, rapid fire blogging, typos are frequent. You seem an affable gentleman, and I suspect we agree on the childishness of impugning an individual’s intellect on such grounds. At the risk of presumptuousness, I hope I speak for everyone here in apologizing for the repeated misspellings of your name. That said, the correct spelling is B-E-L-I-E-V-E*.
Wishing you a pleasant day.
*Remember, I before E accept after C."""
A game hen! Not unlike a Cornish hen. Yet that is besides the point.
Yes, I am well aware of the small incident concerning Dan Rather. I was paying attention at the time.
You mention the example as a method to demonstrate the media is not always trustworthy, and that documents can be forged. You could also use this untimely profession of foolishness on CBS' part to say that bloggers can make a big difference in exposing lies. And yes, you would be right.
So go ahead, expose the document as false like the bloggers did in 2004. The mainstream media outlets quickly followed with their expert analysis then, and they would do so now. Conclusively prove that it is a falsification, a forgery. Bring in the experts to analyze it. Otherwise you have nothing but conjecture.
I'm waiting.
""" Game Hen, Part Deux said...
Mr. Cornish,
“Why should I devote my blog time to something already thoroughly debunked?”
Why, indeed! Pray tell, why are you here? Your efforts are clearly for naught. I’m perplexed that one who inhabits and enjoys the virtual circle jerk that is the Palin web ring would spend their valuable time in conflict with individuals you’re so unlikely to persuade.
“I came here to make a declaration and ask a question.”
Ohhh, well then that makes perfect sense. Except, how's that working out thus far?*
“Confident enough to use my real name.”
Given that two of your most vile cohorts think it acceptable to investigate, harass, intimidate and expose those with whom they disagree, it is entirely reasonable that no one publish sans anonymity.
What ethical system allows you to affirm such ignominious, dishonorable and thoroughly un-American tactics?
Finally, care to explain how a FIFE-PAC contributing, Ron Paul republican lobbies on behalf of Mrs. Palin’s debt producing, anti-free market policies? I’m stumped.
Keep up the good work. No pun intended.
*Impotent (Adj.): without force or effectiveness; unable to attain or sustain a penile erection"""
So afraid of Dan Riehl and R.S. McCain? Your trepidation is so thoroughly confounding, but revealing. Only the miscreants and vagabonds of the blogger world should feel any semblance of fear from them.
To be very clear, Mr. Cornish, I expressed neither fear and trepidation, only revulsion. The desire to comment anonymously does not make one a miscreant or vagabond.
"""Given that two of your most vile cohorts think it acceptable to investigate, harass, intimidate and expose those with whom they disagree, it is entirely reasonable that no one publish sans anonymity. """
Then why state this?
"""Given that two of your most vile cohorts think it acceptable to investigate, harass, intimidate and expose those with whom they disagree, it is entirely reasonable that no one publish sans anonymity. """
I'm think, perhaps, you erred in you response.
""" Henny, Part Four said...
I'm think, perhaps, you erred in you response."""
I doubt that.
Let's not pretend not to know the real reason behind why you and the other posters here remain anonymous.
The fact is, liars need that cloak of disguise to protect themeselves. I simply tell the truth, hence there is no reason to hide my real name.
Post a Comment