Sunday, 1 November 2009

Palin Politics ~ SP is Way More CP than LP or GOP…

Article by Leah Burton - Cross-posted on ""

There has been and will continue to be debate about the formation of a “3rd” Party, and whether or not Palin and the vocal minority that support her are in the process of firing one up.

Essentially, the Republican Party in America is imploding, and the Political Dominionist interests that hi-jacked it 30 years ago are getting some pushback. So what happens now? Well, a battle that could either bring down the GOP, or fracture it severely leaving a dismal chance of recouping even a shred of credibility and legitimacy of who they once were.

To this I say…bring on the split! These dominionism theologists (such as Palin) need to move their extremism into a Party that is conducive to their twisted views of America being founded as a Christian nation. She and her ilk are a minority, but a minority that disbanded the GOP and alienated the secular conservatives who once steered their Party with dignity.

In their drive to wed church & state, they have turned this into a mockery. The embarrassment is international! Simply by allowing bigoted and hateful blowhards like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter to even pretend to represent any assemblance of GOP leadership was the sign of an irreversible cancer diagnosis for the republican party.

So now…where do they go? I have written a couple of posts in the past few months about this very topic and I continue to get comments from those who defend Palin as a Republican; and then those who argue emphatically that she is actually a Libertarian; but I will hold to my assertion that if she were a FIT for any Party that is already in place…it is without a doubt…the Constitution Party.

So…I offer this analysis in response. Let’s first look at the overriding platforms of both Parties…

Libertarian Party (LP):


As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others."

Already Palin’s wheels fall off the LP track, given that the dominionist theology that she is devoted to wouldn’t have a purpose if they were to endorse individual sovereignty free of their skewed religious beliefs.

"We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized.

Consequently, we defend each person’s right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power.

In the following pages we have set forth our basic principles and enumerated various policy stands derived from those principles.

These specific policies are not our goal, however. Our goal is nothing more nor less than a world set free in our lifetime, and it is to this end that we take these stands.

LP Platform Statement of Principles (only these two are necessary to make my point)

"1.3 Personal Relationships

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the rights of individuals by government, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships.

1.4 Abortion

Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.

These two LP principles alone are counter to Palin’s religio-political beliefs without a shred of doubt!

Now let’s re-visit an excerpt from the…

Constitution Party (CP):


The Constitution Party gratefully acknowledges the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States. We hereby appeal to Him for mercy, aid, comfort, guidance and the protection of His Providence as we work to restore and preserve these United States.

Okay…right here in the first paragraph…SOLD! Now this is talking Palin!

"This great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been and are afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.

The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations and to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries[...]

[...]The U.S. Constitution established a Republic rooted in Biblical law, administered by representatives who are Constitutionally elected by the citizens. In such a Republic all Life, Liberty and Property are protected because law rules. We affirm the principles of inherent individual rights.

Now let’s look at the two CP principles on abortion and homosexuality that we covered above in the LP principles….and I am confident that you will instantly recognize the stark contrast between these two diametrically opposing view points and that it would be against Sarah’s religion to even consider complying with a pro-choice of anything preamble and platform.

"1) Sanctity of Life

The pre-born child, whose life begins at fertilization, is a human being created in God’s image. The first duty of the law is to prevent the shedding of innocent blood. It is, therefore, the duty of all civil governments to secure and to safeguard the lives of the pre-born.

No government may legalize the taking of the unalienable right to life without justification, including the life of the pre-born; abortion may not be declared lawful by any institution of state or local government – legislative, judicial, or executive. The right to life should not be made dependent upon a vote of a majority of any legislative body.

2) Family

The law of our Creator defines marriage as the union between one man and one woman.
The marriage covenant is the foundation of the family, and the family is fundamental in the maintenance of a stable, healthy and prosperous social order. No government may legitimately authorize or define marriage or family relations contrary to what God has instituted. We are opposed to amending the U.S. Constitution for the purpose of defining marriage.

We oppose all efforts to impose a new sexual legal order through the federal court system. We stand against so-called “sexual orientation” and “hate crime” statutes that attempt to legitimize inappropriate sexual behavior and to stifle public resistance to its expression. We oppose government funding of “partner” benefits for unmarried individuals. Finally, we oppose any legal recognition of homosexual unions.

Now -you tell me. If you were a Palin ideologue…which party would you feel an affinity with? It is abundantly obvious and very disturbing…

Please click on the title of the post or CLICK HERE before using the toolbar for sharing.


Lynn said...

Wow, how misleading is the name Constitution Party. wow. and wow again.

snowbilly said...

Once the libertarians, conservatives and republicans (the ones the palinbots call RINOs) understand her allegiances they should rightly abandon her in shock and horror.

The palinbots are hijacking the republican party. Where will they crash the plane? Sarah Palin and her backers want a theocracy. The palinbots want to hijack the republican party because it's a major party. If they succeed at that, they will attempt to hijack the country. We can't afford to let them crash that.

snowbilly said...

If you check-out the Constitution Paryt, you'll find out that its Alaskan affiliate is -- wait for it! -- the Alaskan Independence Party.

wes_ben said...


Anonymous said...

Um, great post. But shouldn't the graphic be labeled NSFW? Or put a little band-aid on it?

snowbilly said...

Once Sarah Palin's big-business backers figure out that she is unreliable and goes rogue, they probably will crucify her. They are using her for her fanbase, just like moderate republicans used them for a reliable voting block by appealing to them over social issues. When Max Blumenthal went to the teabagger's circus in D.C., he talked to many of them and found out they don't have health insurance, while one of the wheels behind that movement, Dick Armey, (also endorsed Hoffman in NY-23 before Palin did), is an insurance company lobbyist.

Anonymous said...

That's a man's body....why does it need to be labelled or NSFW?

Anonymous said...

Sarah Palin WANTS TO BE crucified. She lives for it. She wants to be regarded as a victim. You Betcha!

Anonymous said...

I'm thinking she needs her half a tiara for second-runner up, plus a half-term governor award sash...but I love it!

Anonymous said...

@17:10 - it may be a man's body, but it looks like it could be SP's body. I get the crucifixion/Christ commentary in the graphic, believe me.

Anonymous said...

I don't care how much anyone disagrees with any politician, or any ideal, this photo has got to be the most disgusting thing anyone could think of. It is disturbing and if an apology isnt sent out about it, I won't be coming to this site ever again.

Anonymous said...

The drawing is alright. We shouldn't desecrate an iconic image with a bandaid.

snowbilly said...

I support the use of the picture.

Lisabeth said...

There is no doubt the Palinbots should be affiliated with that constitution party but they want the "name"Republican. It's confusing. There are lots of conservatives who don't like Palin at all. So I hope Sarah does start her own party. Go for it Sarah!!!! You go girl ROFL

The Palinbots are going to freak over that graphic if they see it. I think it speaks volumes and accurately depicts Palin and her followers. It's too bad they are so stupid that they don't get how Jesus would view it. Then again, they have their own warped interpretation of Christianity and the teachings of Jesus.

Patrick said...

Interesting observations by Sarah Palin's "unwanted" biographer Joe McGinness (H/T Bree Palin) - he confirms the detailed information that we were given by our Alaskan sources that the Palin's are building a house and an airplane hangar next to it:

"I stopped by her house," says McGinniss, who brought along a copy of his 1980 book, "Going to Extremes," about his adventures in Alaska. "Her son Track answered the door, [just back from Iraq]. We had a pleasant chat. He said he'd give her the book."

McGinniss was struck by the size of the construction on the lot the Palins have bought next to their present home.

"They're building another house and an airplane hangar," he says. "It's like a summer White House in the making. Just based on the size of the compound, I'd say Sarah and Todd are staying together."

As for reports of infidelity, he says, "I'm not intending to write a salacious book about Sarah Palin's sex life. But if it's true, I'll find out."

McGinniss, whose book is due out in 2011, says he approached about 40 people in Wasilla for interviews; only one didn't want to talk.

"A lot of people don't like her as much now that she's quit," he says. "And now that she's not the governor, she doesn't have the power of retribution she had before."


Anonymous said...

Anon 17:28, why are you so against the image? The point is that Palins supporters treat her as if she is Christ. It's terrible-they are so unobjective. The image is shocking but so are the Palinbots. They are blind to all of the immoral and unethical things she does. And Sarah BELIEVES God chose her and that she can do whatever the F she wants. She is above the law in her mind and she is a victim for a bigger cause is like Christ.

Please keep the image. It is SO accurate!

snowbilly said...

There is info about AIP people talking about how they go "mainstream" by joining the republican party. There may be something where one of the AIP leaders mentions $P as an example. There is also $P's address to the AIP from the governor's office.

Anonymous said...

Look, I am an artist. I do not want to censor. I am for freedom of speech, too! I think Leah's essay is fantastic, and I don't want it overshadowed by a controversial graphic. But if you think it won't be, great! It's your blog and your call. I am a loyal reader and will continue to be one.

Anonymous said...

Now that is an "iconic image" sure to bring fire and brimstone from the bots.

Did Sarah say the hardest thing about crucifying yourself is driving in the last nail?

Truly Madly Deeply said...

It's not the picture that's disturbing, it's Sarah Palin's victim image that she wants to portray that's disturbing.

Let's keep the picture.

Anonymous said...

What's more controversial, Sarah Palin and the way that she totally distorts her image or a graphic that portrays it.

Anonymous said...

Get ready for bot invasion: 5,4,3,2...

Anonymous said...

Patrick, I think it's unlikely the Palin's will divorce while there is some possibility that she will run for office. The National Examiner recently had an article that described it as a sham marriage and would continue as long as there was the possibility of running. I think that she keeps the hopes alive of another run to keep the cash flowing in, because even a lot of the 'bots would lose interest if she came out and said that she isn't going to run.

Anonymous said...

I am a million times against SP, and I don't like the crucifiction image. BUT I AM TOTALLY OFFENDED BY THE USAGE HERE. I am not a troll nor a Palinbot. Please take it away.
This image is very meaningful to many, many people, and this is a gross offense to them and to me.


Archivist1000 said...

Those of you who find that image 'shocking' haven't spent any time reading Sarah's OFFICIAL site on Facebook. This is the image her fans have of her!

Persecuted by the Media, crucified for her 'honesty and goodness' and martyred for the 'sake of the country'

I have been writing about the Palinbots on my blog for a few months now .. but don'take my word for it, go spend some time there and you will see: That image is the image Palin presents of herself, and the Palinbots see her that way!

Anonymous said...

The Palin bots are Pharisees and this image satirizes their worship of Palin and her own martydom and self-pitying claims of victimization.

She's no pit-bull; she's a whining three time loser who can't finish any job she's ever started because of her claims that others are out to get her.

So, she's paranoid and narcissistic.

The Palin cult will come here and FREAK out, and of course, not get the satire. But expect to find this picture soon on TS, with a shrine around it, and perhaps being sold on Ebay on a velvet Elvis background, because they will soon see that this is the Sarah they "know and love".

Fake prophet Sarah.

wayofpeace said...


In an appearance promoting his book on NBC's "Meet the Press," David Plouffe said that Democrats should "thank John McCain for picking [Palin]" as his running mate.

Pointing to the 2008 vice presidential candidate's role in driving attention and support to Doug Hoffman, the ultra-conservative candidate in the New York 23rd District special election, Plouffe insisted that Palin-led forces were purging the GOP of moderates.

And he wasn't upset with the development.

"What's going on in the special election in NY-23, I think, is a remarkable phenomenon that could affect our politics for years to come," Plouffe said. Palin, he added, was "kind of playing the role of pied piper in Republican politics, which I'm quite comfortable with -- basically hanging a 'moderates need not apply' sign."

Read more at:

Fiifitrixiebelle said...

There is nothing moderate about Sarah Palin and art should reflect that fact.

I don't find this image distasteful I find it illuminating.

Anonymous said...

Sarah Palin says she didn’t answer Katie Couric’s questions because she was “annoyed.”

This excuse will require us to ignore the deer-in-the-headlight look and the fumbling and reaching but, okay let’s say we buy it.

Is that what we want in a President? I was annoyed so I just didn’t answer-a member of the press-the American people? I was annoyed so I took my ball and went home?

That excuse sounds a lot like something that comes out of the mouth of my 12 year old when she does poorly on a test-the teacher is hard, he doesn’t teach, it’s not my fault.

It doesn’t fly at my house, and I would hate to think it would at the White House.

shamelessly from: here

wv=zyzancin new med. for $P

Anonymous said...

The upper body looks like plucked bird wings :D

Yep, she lives for ridicule and criticism... the Devil only attacks those he fears! Those that are true Saints furthering God's grand plan

The thing is.. twisted girl MAKES people ridicule her by creating controverial situations
That is not the same thing Sarah Pants!

I'm sure the Devil is actually quite proud of her.. doing his evil deeds in the name of the Lawd..

Anonymous said...

How ever accurate the satire is on the graphic, it gives people a reason to dismiss our arguments, which are founded in evidence. That is the danger.

This was the best blog for overall real evidence against Palin on many "gates." That is what the graphic puts in jeopardy.

But it's your blog! I will remain a loyal reader.

snowbilly said...

LA Times piece on Sarah Palin's affiliation with the AIP, here.

AIP is the Alaskan affiliate of the Constitution Party, so she does fit right into that party. Also.

Anonymous said...

Shock value=9

Accuracy value=10

Lest we forget that $P has presented herself to her followers as the be all end all, this "iconic" image is as accurate a portrayal of her as I have seen. She has hijacked your Christ, people. If you don't like it, DO something about it.

Anonymous said...

Yes, this picture is shocking and disturbing. So is Palin. If you haven't noticed THAT, then you haven't been paying attention.

Anonymous said...

"She has hijacked your Christ, people. If you don't like it, DO something about it."

Actually, I am not disturbed personally. I am disturbed politically as I do not want this blog's "brand" dissed.

But maybe I am just too non-aggressive.

Truly Madly Deeply said...


In what way would an "accurate" portrayal of something then put in doubt the blog's contents?

I'm sorry that does not make sense.

Rather an accurate portrayal backs up the blog's arguments.

Anon 18:09 said...

@Truly, Madly, Deeply - I have worked with satire before. Have you? I have published satire. I can tell you, it's complicated when you are trying to reach those of an opposing viewpoint. If you are preaching to the choir, like with an "in joke," it's great.

But for "reaching across the aisle," it's doesn't really work well.

Anon 18:09 said...

Also, it's a satirical graphic with a serious essay.

Anonymous said...

I think it's important to point out that this graphic does NOT come from Leah Burton's site. It's specific to this one. You know, as controversial as it is, or will become, it's important to give "credit" where credit is due.

And it will become controversial once "they" get ahold of it.

Anonymous said...

It works to generate cognitive dissonance in the 'bots, too. Many of them are unaware of what they fundamentally believe and are doing. They are crucifying Sarah Palin all the time.

Anonymous said...

Co-sign with anonymous at 18:09

Anonymous said...

The image fits right into the beliefs of the palinbots. They believe she's been crucified by MSM, "liberals" like McCain, and "limousine conservatives" like David Brooks.

EyeOnYou said...

I understand the idea and the concept behind the photo, and I agree with it.

Having said that, this IS an iconic photo of some peoples religious beliefs, not all of whom are Palin supporters, and I am not surprised to find that it would horribly offensive to them.

My own personal reaction is that it is better not to offend peoples religious beliefs who are in your corner to make a point that could easily be made in other ways.

Anonymous said...

It must also be remembered that this is the image that Palin wants her supporters to believe - the image of self sacrifice and martyrdom.

Palin constantly portrays herself as the victim.

Anon 18:09 said...

We have 44 comments now, most of which debate the merits of the graphic and not the essay.

ProChoiceGrandma said...

I have some suggestions that could be painted onto the crucifixion picture so it would be less “offensive”:

Paint on her mini-skirt that she wore to the memorial service;

Paint on her black patent leather f*ck-me boots;

OMG! You forgot the FLAG! Gotta have the Red White and Blue draped on her skinny ass. However, then I would object to her desecrating MY flag. Sarah should have her own red & white stripes, and instead of the Stars, put in the AIP state of Alaska symbol in the blue.

And last but not least, where are the two Blackberries??

Anonymous said...

the fact that Palin wanted Schmidt to lie about Todd's AIP connections preoves to me that Palin has an agenda that she wants to hide from the American people.

ProChoiceGrandma said...

For the reason given by Anon at 18:41, I would agree to remove the picture.
“We have 44 comments now, most of which debate the merits of the graphic and not the essay.”

snowbilly said...

The name "Constitution Party" may have a warm-fuzzy appeal to the ignorant and uninformed, but

The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations ...

The constitution established the federal judiciary, which is not mentioned in biblical law. What do they propose to do with that?

It should be called what it is: the Seditious Party.

Amy1 said...

A huge leap from Palin gates to this graphic, and one I do not find useful or appropriate.

Anonymous said...

Someone is working the media

snowbilly said...

I think the graphic illustrates some of the issues the essay touches, so it should stay.

HistoryGoddess said...

The essay is great! By focusing on the positions of two of the most divisive issues, one can easily see what the CP truly stands for, and how well it reflects that woman's views as told to her by her puppeteers.

What our founding fathers wanted- my ass! The CP is anything but constitutional.

That being said, I agree with "eye" and others before me. I am not comfortable at all with the graphic. I admire many of the true Christ-like teachings. I am not too into his loudest followers, though. Nailing her up to a cross made up of her stupid words, or the bones of those she's thrown under the bus...fine. This cross is truly iconic for many people and cultures that know THAT woman is not truly a Christian.

Now the photoshopping of Sarah and Trigg- that was great, but iconic only to Meg Whatever and the 'bots.

Anonymous said...

Sarah falls down in the Character and Moral section

+++++Public respect and esteem toward public officials has fallen to a shameful level. The Constitution Party finds that a cause of this national state of disgrace is the deterioration of personal character among government leaders, exacerbated by the lack of public outcry against immoral conduct by public office holders. Our party leaders and public officials must display exemplary qualities of honesty, integrity, reliability, moral uprightness, fidelity, prudence, temperance, justice, fortitude, self-restraint, courage, kindness, and compassion. If they cannot be trusted in private life, neither can they be trusted in public life.

It is imperative the members and nominated candidates representing the Constitution Party and its state affiliates recognize the importance of demonstrating good character in their own lives.++++++

ProChoiceGrandma said...

It really irks me that these fanatics besmirch the Constitution by using it in their party name. I would like to see a lawsuit to force them to remove “Constitution” from their name for false advertising. Their position is anti-Constitution.

They should change it to the Religilous Party so they can still use the R next to their candidates’ names.

sandra said...

If you leave the picture, please give an attribute. It appears that it was with Leah's article. The picture does not illustrate the text;it is another topic.

I'm pretty liberal on religion, but I feel offended by this picture. The picture of the angel was much better.

Anonymous said...

Keep talking about the images. Don't believe "white trash idiot" says Coulter. Powers agrees. Fair and balanced. Keep talking about the images.

Anonymous said...

I am a Christian and Jesus is deep in my heart..
but the image of Christ on the cross has always bothered me
It's offensive
The point of Christianity is not him dying a pitiful, humiliating death but the fact that strange things happened "afterwards"

The cross image (with him on it.. not the regular cross) is like showing a murdered victim on the floor bloody... you remember the person before they died, pay homage to how they died, and then move onto what they mean now that they are gone...

Palin with her bat wings on the cross just shows how her "christianity" is all about "works and image and look at me" .. not true spiritualism

but I just speak for myself

Anonymous said...

I am offended by all the blue eyed blonde Jesus images. He looks nothing like his heritage. Very offensive that is so widely accepted.

Anonymous said...

So the right portray Levi as a "white trash idiot" and we get all hissy because of a graphic that reflects Palin's personality?

Anonymous said...

sorry ... clicked too soon
SOO this Palin image on the cross does not offend me

Christ on the cross is offensive to me.. it's like remembering him weak and pitiful
So slap her on there..
she is weak and pitiful

snowbilly said...

It could be that the image immediately provokes this thought, "SARAH PALIN IS NOT JESUS!"

crystalwolf aka caligrl said...

Although the picture could be considered "pushing the envelope" I am shocked that people aren't more SHOCKED about the constitution party that wants to do away with the constitution and give us a Theocracy!
And yes the AIP who we know Palin is affiliated with and backed is the Alaskan Version of it!
She is right now Bragging about the Repub. that Quit (like her) and supposed paved the way for HER candidate that SHE endorsed to win!
And if this candidate wins SHE will take credit for it!!! Is that not shocking!!!
If you have read "The Family" you would know these people have a completely brainwashed illogical mindset THAT IS SHOCKING!
They couldn't hijack the Repub party so they are trying now with the "constitution Party" and misnomer if I ever saw it!

sjk from the belly of the plane said...

re: the Wedding of Church and State...Lets just suppose that the Churh and the State are both MALE institutions. Does that mean its a GAY MARRIAGE?


Anonymous said...

Rev. Muthee's thoughts about Sarah Palin can be enlightening. He thinks she's on god's mission. Sarah Palin, herself, talks about missions from god: the gas pipeline, the war in Iraq.

They do see her as some sort of redeemer. They even talk of an Alaskan refuge in the end times.

Leah Burton said...

As author of the article I would like to say that I find that image disturbing as well...and with any luck I have requested that it be changed. It is not my intent to mock Palin, but to inform about just who she really is and why we need to care.

What is happening in our party system is serious and could have a healthy outcome if we are involved and proactive. But it is also a time of serious concern with regard to the extreme followers of Palin, Bachman, Huckabee, et al.

Political Dominionists steeple-jacked the GOP while we had our heads turned. (and I was a political lobbyist and missed the profundity of what was occurring)...we can't let them slip off into a corner and create an even more extreme christo-fascist party and not pay attention this time.

Keep the dialogue going! (And sorry for the picture)

Leah Burton

winkwinkWA said...

No matter what your beliefs are I think is is wrong to use Sarah in Christ's image. Let the Palinbot think that , I don't think this image helps our cause, which is to bring her down with truths not help make her an icon. Don't stoop to their level, this is not the way to do it in my opinion.

Anonymous said...

I agree and it's unfortunate that this image was put with Leah's post. I know her and she would never put an image like this on here. I am sure it's very frustrating for her because it is distracting and turns this into a completely different kind of debate. Great post! Keep the comments coming.

sjk from the belly of the plane said...

re: the Wedding of Church and State...Lets just suppose that the Churh and the State are both MALE institutions. Does that mean its a GAY MARRIAGE?


The picture is no more or less offeensive than the RW "fuck me" on the Flag pic.

Anonymous said...

Thank you, Leah, for weighing in. I wondered what you thought of it. I respect your work so much.

Anonymous said...

maybe I haven't had enough coffee this morning, but what's the RW on the flag pic? :-)

sandra said...

Thank you for the adjustment. I went over to the opposition ocean to look for comments and found an even more disturbing graphic. It shows a western European Jesus leading historical American heroes. The only person of color is a child. Didn't stay long enough to see why they thought it was good.

I'm beginning to think we live in two different countries.

Leah Burton said...

Thank you! ...for removing the image.

:) Leah

Anonymous said...

I for one am appalled that there has been such a fuss about that graphic and that it has been taken down.

Point of fact Palin is a media whore and she definitely whores around her religion.

We should call her out as the victim that she presents herself as. That graphic does that.

Anonymous said...

That is ugly and I would never hang that as art or as a statement near my house.
I do think it works here, except it is distracting. I do consider the Leah Burton point of view.

If the image gets it's own thread, that might work?

No one cares that I am offended by the blue eyed blonde images of Christ over the years in literature we are to take serious and believe is true. It is more offensive then I can say here.

I do support leaving the image. I wish people could over come being so effected on this thread.

P.S. I think I put this on the wrong thread. sorry.

Patrick said...

Hi Leah and others,

we were not aware that the image would offend so many of our faithful readers, and of course we don't want to take all the attention away from an article which is so important. Therefore I have now removed the picture, which showed Sarah Palin as Jesus Christ on the cross.

I would like to make clear that the picture was chosen by palingates alone and not by Leah Burton.

If you are interested, you will find the picture (together with other pictures which are quite controversial, warning!) on this website:

Anonymous said...

Sorry the image was removed but I respect Leah and that is the best call.

Please put it up again later.

snowbilly said...

Palin blasted out an e-mail with the subject line "Todd" to Schmidt, campaign manager Rick Davis and senior advisor Nicolle Wallace, copying her husband on the message (all of the e-mails are reprinted below as written).

"Pls get in front of that ridiculous issue that's cropped up all day today - two reporters, a protestor's sign, and many shout-outs all claiming Todd's involvement in an anti-American political party," Palin wrote. "It's bull, and I don't want to have to keep reacting to it ... Pls have statement given on this so it's put to bed."

Schmidt hit "reply to all" less than five minutes after Palin's e-mail was sent. "Ignore it," he wrote. "He was a member of the aip? My understanding is yes. That is part of their platform. Do not engage the protestors. If a reporter asks say it is ridiculous. Todd loves america."

From Palin Infighting (goin' rogue)

Anonymous said...

I see that the graphic has been removed - What a pity. I hope to see it used again in another context.

Anonymous said...

Now, can we get back to Leah's excellent essay?

Anonymous said...

Question for the author

So where does she differentiate herself from the GOP?

I ask this because you mention them in your title.

Anonymous said...

P.S. - @19:39 , FWIW, I totally agree with you. Jesus was not blond nor was he blue-eyed. It is a rather "Aryan" depiction of someone from the Middle East, in my opinion.

Back to Leah's essay: What I liked best about this was hope Leah showed through the mission statement how aligned Palin is with the Constitution party and "Biblical law."

wv: dueled

snowbilly said...

This clear cut response from the campaign's top dog carried an air of finality, but it did not satisfy Palin. She responded with another e-mail, adding five more names to the "cc" box, all of whom traveled on her campaign plane. They included her senior political adviser Tucker Eskew, senior aide Jason Recher, the lone traveling aide from her Alaska office Kris Perry, press secretary Tracey Schmitt and personal assistant Bexie Nobles.

Palin's insertion of the five additional staffers in the e-mail chain was an apparent attempt to rally her own troops in the face of a decision from the commanding general with which she disagreed. Her inclusion of her personal assistant was particularly telling about her quest for affirmation and support in numbers, since the young staffer was not in a position to have any input on campaign strategy.

"That's not part of their platform and he was only a 'member' bc independent alaskans too often check that 'Alaska Independent' box on voter registrations thinking it just means non partisan," Palin wrote. "He caught his error when changing our address and checked the right box. I still want it fixed."

Palin was attempting to bend the facts ever so slightly to fit neatly into her version of events. In truth, the box that Alaskans have the option of checking when registering to vote states the full name of the party, "Alaskan Independence Party," not "Alaska Independent," which would make an error by uncommitted voters more plausible.

Clearly irritated by what he saw as Palin's attempt to mislead her own campaign and apparently determined to demonstrate that the ultimate authority rested with him, Schmidt put the matter to rest once and for all with a longer response to everyone in the e-mail chain.

"Secession," he wrote. "It is their entire reason for existence. A cursory examination of the website shows that the party exists for the purpose of seceding from the union. That is the stated goal on the front page of the web site. Our records indicate that todd was a member for seven years. If this is incorrect then we need to understand the discrepancy. The statement you are suggesting be released would be innaccurate. The innaccuracy would bring greater media attention to this matter and be a distraction. According to your staff there have been no media inquiries into this and you received no questions about it during your interviews. If you are asked about it you should smile and say many alaskans who love their country join the party because it speeks to a tradition of political independence. Todd loves his country

We will not put out a statement and inflame this and create a situation where john has to adress this."

Schmidt's rebuttal to Palin's suggestion that reporters had asked her about the issue was particularly blunt in that it implicitly questioned her truthfulness. Furthermore, his unwillingness to budge an inch on the matter was a remarkable assertion of his power to pull rank over the candidate herself.

Gone Rogue

snowbilly said...

I think we have:

1) Todd's membership in the AIP

2) AIP's affiliation with the Constituion Party

3) Sarah's AIP convention attendance

4) AIP leader's assertion about "mainstreaming" their candidates as republicans, and, possibly, Sarah Palin cited as an example of that "mainstreaming"

5) Sarah's address to the AIP from the governor's chair

6) Sarah's sensitivity about the AIP during the VP campaign

All of these suggest that Sarah Palin has some splainin' to do, especially considering the seditionist nature of the Constitution Party in light of their desire to establish a theocracy.

Leah Burton said...

In response to the question about the difference between the other parties and the GOP...the GOP is fractured. It was "steeple-jacked" by what was known in decades past as the Religious Right. What separates the GOP from the CP is that there are two basic populations in the GOP: the politically secular republicans and the 'c'hristian extremists who infested the party precinct by precinct.

The CP lays out the agenda for a society based on biblical law right up front without any hidden agenda. The GOP has become a party who is piloted by the same religious views, shoving the moderates into a desert of "where do we fit in?"

The only state that has in its GOP state party platform language that echoes the CP theocracy is Texas...and that is a trend that has legs. It would be best for all if these theocrats would grow a spine and shift their intent to the existing party that accommodates their true goals.

The GOP may or may not survive this muddled existence...but the cowards who tool it over need to be kicked out so we can get back to arguing over whether to fill the potholes...and for how much! NOT who's god is real...

Leah Burton said...

Palin's affiliation with the Alaska Independece Party has been a topic of much debate since she first hit our radars. The bottom line is this:

It matters not to me whether there is a paper with her name on the membership roster or not, whether it was misplaced, lost or destroyed. Her video comments as governor in 2008 to the convention of the AIP indicates from her lips to all our ears, a camaraderie and endorsement of the AIP in general. That leaves no room for doubt.

Furthermore, at that same convention which I posted on my blog, they discuss the practice of running candidates in ANY long as they win. That is all that matters. Palin ran as a republican in Alaska for various reasons, not the least of which was that it provided her the greatest likelihood of winning.

That she decried, "I am not, nor have I ever been a member of the AIP"...smacks clearly of denial and 'thou doth protest too much'. I frankly don't care what this woman is what she does that concerns me more.

She is nothing if not manipulative, dishonest and secretive.

Anonymous said...

So perhaps this is Sarah's grand plan, after all. Doing more work "outside of government" to make the consititutional party a separate and distinct entity from the gop. (or RINOs, as the PalinPatriots say). Go for it, Sarah. Just make sure you are honest about your beliefs and goals. They are not Republican, not by definition. And the CP certainly seems to be a party of white, straight, Christians only. Good luck with that in the future...because the United States is definitely moving away from being white, and as far as straight and non-Christians, we're making gains in acceptance there...which can only lead to those attributes being less "closeted". Yes, let's see how far you get with the party of hate.

Somehow thinking that she might actually have a plan makes her scarier than ever.


Anonymous said...

Breaking ... Sarah's got another he-said/she-said going over A cclaim that she asked Dagget in NJ to drop out of the governor's race!

Anonymous said...

Snowbilly @20:07

Don't forget Palin's photo with "con-con" material:

Anonymous said...

Whoa! I'm glad that the moral majority didn't have so much influence in the past as they do these days.

If the historical moral majority had had their way we wouldn't have access to literature such as Chaucer's Canterbury Tales and the metaphysical poetry of Andrew Marvell and John Donne. It simply wouldn't have got past their illustrious censorship noses. Why? Because the themes discussed in those texts might have offended the strict views of the day that unmarried people did not have sex?

Palin uses her religion as a cross on which to hang herself upon. She promotes herself as a victim and thinks of herself as an iconic figure. She uses religious code words in order to send hidden messages to her supporters that she will deliver for them. She is a fanatic and if she gains power she will usher in a new age of laws that will leave us all trembling.

I leave you with this image which Sandra mentioned.

You better hurry on over quick to complain before it too disappears.

You'll be shocked I tell ya...shocked!

Anonymous said...

yeah removing the image might be a good thing.. good move

If we are hoping some Palin lovers sniff around this site.. all you need is for one of them to finally make the fearful move and click and then see that photo ( on a sunday church day of all days) .. and gasp that this site truly is the devil's work

Patrick said...

What a coincidence! We posted a controversial picture today which we decided to remove in the end (Sarah Palin as Jesus on the cross), and look what our "friends" from Cee4Pee posted today:

conservatives4palin have the real offensive stuff

They linked to this picture - NOW, that's what I would call offensive, and the fact that the Palinbots like this picture just highlights how incredibly important Leah Burton's post and her work in general is:


Patrick said...

This controversial right-wing picture "One Nation Under God" which I had just mentioned and which C4P had posted just today on their website loads very slowly on the artist's site, because it's an interactive picture.

You will find the picture in non-interactive form here (loads quickly):

’One Nation Under God’ – controversial right-wing painting as JPEG and not as interactive picture

Leah Burton said...

Here are a couple previous posts that I have done on this topic over the past few months and they include video for you as well...

These are in order of posting and will give more details to support this post today.

Patrick said...

However, I have to point out that the interactive painting is highly interesting because the artists also explains his "enemies" there when you hover over the picture, like "Liberal News Reporter", "Mr. Hollywood", "Professor" (comment for the "Professor": "Humanism dominates the educational system of America and I believe that is wrong").

Looks like Soviet-style "Christian-nationalistic" propaganda to me...

snowbilly said...

In the interactive picture, mousing over the document held in Sarah's stand-in's hand, it says, "Inspired by god and created by god fearing, patriotic Americans." If that is the case, why did it take so long to write the constitution in Philadelphia? Did god inspire the 3/5 of a person rule about the slaves for census purposes? These dominionists are either ignorant and uninformed or deceitful. Maybe all thres.

Anonymous said...

Mouse over the flag. It says there are fifty stars, and some of them shine brighter than others. In what respect, Sarah? Could they be the stars of the states a part of "Real America?"

Anonymous said...

yeah, and in the picture the mother holds a handicapped child.........

Anonymous said...

Re: one nation under god is art, and he's certainly entitled to express himself however he sees fit. But I personally enjoyed his (unconscious?) irony about "Professors" (they're bad) and "American Schoolteachers" (they're good). Ummm, you have to go to college to be a teacher. I suppose the good teachers are able to filter out all the liberal rantings about evolution and such, and still be able to be good little women who only care about raising children - the mamas at school.

Also too - love how the little blond boy is just titled "handicap child".

Don't even get me started on Jesus holding the Constitution. (I had never even heard of the CP until today....but apparently I've been missing out.)

I guess what bothers me the most is the assertion that anyone who is educated, dares to think/question, is non-white, is obviously on the side of Satan. I'm surprised he didn't include some drawing of teh gehz in there to make his point, also too. But I guess someone that close to Jesus wouldn't know anyone gay, right???!!!???


Anonymous said...

Todd is a man with needs so once his "Jennifer Flowers" comes out against all this divorce backdrop it will be hard to ignore. whoever she is, she will give him the ultimatum or go public with info

how could the USA resist her affair claims against all this soap opera drama?

whoever Todd is with/been with ,she will be a superstar!

Patrick said...

Interesting news over at Bree Palin:

Dede Scozzafava now supports Democrat William L. Owens, and newspaper switched recommendation from Republican to Democrat!

Anonymous said...

Move over, Thomas Kinkade. It's the McNaughton Fine Art Company. Jon McNaughton sez: ...
(Thanks Sue, who calls it a "jaw dropper")
Jon McNaughton images

McNaughton Fine Art Company
"One Nation Under God"
McNaughton response to liberal criticisms of "One Nation Under God"

"One Nation Under God" does take forever to appear...the interactive part is interesting.

Jon McNaughton sez: "As I stated in my interview, I wanted to create an image that would instantly be recognizable as Jesus. I am not painting and anthropological Jesus. Nobody would recognize him if I painted him that way."

"Nobody would recognize him" Nobody?

COMICMIX: Jesus, meet Jon McNaughton

Jesus Painting Uproar

Jesse Cornish said...

To stay on topic:

It doesn't matter what the party of a candidate is. The character and beliefs of the the person running does matter, though.

Anonymous said...

Yeah JC. And Palin is a proven liar. So much for character.

Patrick said...

Somebody had the great idea and attached some REAL statements of the depicted politicans on the "One Nation Under God" painting:

Anonymous said...

There must be a lot of business opportunities to sell things to the 'bots.

sandra said...

Jesse: As usual you have brought up an important point. Of course the person is more important than the party. But we are seeing a demise of the cohesiveness of political parties.

It used to be that the party conventions were televised with attention to the debates within the party. We would be briefed on platform planks with debates over candidates and who could vote, etc.

It seems that in recent years, all we have seen are "shows." Great videography with music and lights, etc. It is as if everyone in the room is in lock step with the nominees. The parties seem to reflect the candidates rather than the other way around.

No wonder so many people don't want to identify with a party. How can you tell what it is?

Anonymous said...

Thanks Patrick!
REAL statements of the depicted politicans

Anonymous said...

@Sandra. Excellent commentary.

snowbilly said...

Archivist1000 hasn't crucified her, but has certainly, once again, pointed out that $P hoists herself with her own petard.

She owns her facebook page, no? She censors objectionable material, no? But she does allow the sentiments she agrees with to remain posted, and those can be ugly.

Anonymous said...

Sarah Palin has joined the tabloid circus.

Anonymous said...

Yesterday, Sarah was congratulating Dede for her "selflessness," in dropping out of the NY-23 race. Today, Dede endorsed the democratic candidate. $P was right, Dede is supporting her district. Scarah's head must have exploded; she is clearly out of touch with NY-23.

Anonymous said...

I know that we're not supposed to feed or encourage the trolls, but Jesse's point about the person not the party makes some important points:

1. That would make Jesse a true Independent. (I doubt it).

2. Loyal Republican voters who usually chose party over person just could not bring themselves to vote for McCain/Palin because of Palin. They would be the reason that some previously red states went surprisingly blue in the last election.

3.Party matters when it comes to getting nominated for public office. Other than Jesse Venture, who really was quite a maverick, few independents or third party candidates get elected. Just ask Ralph Nader or Ross Perot how that turned out. The candidate needs the organization behind him/her to knock on doors, make phone calls, get out the vote, and for financial backing. People who are not good team players and do not play well with the party may find that they are not getting supported.

Which brings us to NY congressional election. Why didn't the GOP back Dede? Where are their guts? Well, that's the delight, watching regular and moderate Republicans getting played by the super duper conservatives.

4. Where I live, one political party is dominant, and in the good old days when you could vote a straight party ticket with one click or pull of a lever, alot of jerks and corrupt individuals were elected. To be a true, good independent voter, one has to study all of the issues, look up each candidate to see where they fall on the issues. watch every speech and local debate. It's alot of work being an informed voter.

Thank goodness, enough people chose person over party last November. So, thanks Jesse, for the important civics lesson.

Anonymous said...

Leah's post on dailykos, here.

ProChoiceGrandma said...

RE: the interactive picture One Nation Under God:

The part that disturbs me immensely is what is written describing the little boy pointing at the Constitution:

“Rising Generation - Who are the rising generation that this little boy represents? He symbolizes the young children, both male and female, of all color and ethnicity, which are being taught the true principles of our Republic by parents who believe in the Constitution.”

Whose “Republic” is this artist referring to – the American Reich Republic? Hitler’s Youth revitalized? THIS rendering should scare the bejeebus out of every parent and grandparent in America. And especially the great-grandparents who remember the Nazi’s and the hate and destruction wrought upon the world by Hitler’s Third Reich. I fail to see any difference between Hitler’s “cleansing” and the Religious Reich’s vision of imposing a theocrazy upon our nation and other nations. Hitler’s Youth were taught Hitler’s vision, and now these American religious fanatics are teaching their “true principles” to our young children? Brainwashing, pure and simple. Dubya already led the way with vouchers for “faith based schools” to take funding away from public education.

Jesse Cornish said...

First, to be quite clear, I am an independent conservative not beholden to any political party.

Second, and this is coming from a close observer of McCain's campaign last year, I did not support him. I supported another candidate, and only reluctantly voted for McCain, if only because Palin was on the ticket.

And yes, party does matter, which is why I supported a revitalized Republican party. I believe conservatism can win if we only try to run on such a platform.

If Sarah Palin ever runs for President, then she will run on the Republican ticket. She will never go with a third pary.

Finally, I think there is a lot of buyer's remorse among former Obama voters. Consider his low approval ratings. The next time up he won't have as easy a road to the White House.

Anonymous said...

PCG - good post. Think of the rise in home-schooling as well (not just the Palins) - many do it to control the religious message that is sent.

Everyone has the right to critique what is taught in public schools - but the bottom line is that YOU cannot decide for other people what will be taught in their schools. I'm a teacher - I did my master's thesis on censorship, and one of the best books I've read on the subject is an older one - Storm in the Mountains.

How many people actually think this way (Conservative Party, Glenn Beck followers, SP's Patriots, etc.)? I don't know, but I will say this. Those of us that fight to keep religion out of government and schools need to be vigilant - we must be involved and make sure it doesn't happen.


Anonymous said...

Rev. Muthee's belief is that Sarah Palin has been chosen to be god's agent on earth. He laid hands on her to drive out the witches. Sarah Palin considers herself to be a prayer-warrior now.

Jesse Cornish said...

So anonymous, what do you think should be done about homeschooling?

Anonymous said...

$P said that Track is not a republican, but did not say that he's a democrat? Is he an AIP member?

Anonymous said...

Sorry - posted too soon. Storm in the Mountains, by James Moffat, is about how a town in West Virginia staged a series of protests about textbooks that weren't appropriately conservative. The protests culminated in a firebombing. Since then, textbook publishers have been afraid to include anything controversial because they fear reprisal by the far-right and the resulting loss of sales.

Not to be off-topic...I think this relates directly to the Sarah Palins of the world. I tend to think of her as ignorant and a fraud, but people are listening, and acting, because of her.


Anonymous said...

JC - I don't want to DO anything about homeschooling. It's legal, and a parent's choice.

I wouldn't choose it for my children, for several reasons. 1. I don't know everything that is taught in school k-12. 2. I think school teaches children how to make friends, function in a society, and exposes them to people who think/look/act differently from them.


Anonymous said...

Is y'all talkin' 'bout home schoolin' or Home Skoolin' ?

Jesse Cornish said...

My mistake then, I misunderstood you and inferred something from your post that you did not intend.

Anonymous said...

So, $arah did not Ask Chris Daggett to drop out? Well, that means that Meg Stapeleton must have. Palin plays with words all the time. See, if she did not personally ask him, then in her mind she is telling the truth. She gets all her minions to do her dirty deeds. She has done it for years. She uses people and then discards them when she is done with them.

Anonymous said...

Back to Leah's post and Sarah Palin's affiliation with AIP and her support of the Constitution Party: I'm so glad that Scozzafava gave her support to Owens. The GOP is imploding.

Anonymous said...

Palin injected herself in a local election in upstate New York (NY-23) by endorsing the Conservative Party candidate over the moderate Republican. As a consequence, her fan sites have been throwing money at a race which is none of their business. While it may be argued that either way it's a loss for the Republican party, it's a potential GAIN for Palin's influence in this country.

We can complain about and dissect every lie Palin spouts but if you want to actually fight against her influence, consider donating to the Democratic opponent in the NY race. If nothing else, it may even the odds of Palin's outside influence. Of interest, the moderate Republican who suspended her campaign after Palin's hit job has now endorsed the Democratic candidate, Bill Owens. Below is the link for donating through ActBlue:

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross." -- Sinclair Lewis ...

Anonymous said...

I love that Sinclair Lewis quote. I don't think that it will be seen as a victory for Palin. Her "FACEBOOK" endorsement came in late.

But it will be seen as a HUGE GOP failure.

I have donated to Owens, and I hope that "carpet teabagging" will not become the norm for the "conservatives" of the Constitution party.

A party is still a "brand," and I don't think the GOP is going to let Sarah Quitter Palin control theirs.

Anonymous said...

News of $P's book has been relegated to the Entertainment Section of UPI. She has a new publicist? She's going on a book tour?

Palin Joins Tabloid Circus

Amy1 said...

Sooooo glad you took that picture down. Distracting beyond measure. Offended me in my respect for religions, and fed into my fear that if we go wide we will not go deep enough on any topic to make a difference.

The Blumenthal video succinctly states (within the first 7 minutes) the intent of religious right to change our country from a democracy to a biblical theocracy according to Leviticus. I encourage y'all to look at it. I find discussion of this ludicrous premise so tedious -- even though it is so very dangerous -- unless one is as well versed as Blumenthal.

That's why the simple concept of babygate still seems so compelling to me. Not simple to unravel it, no. Lots of work, more to come. But once documented, what could be simpler and more clear than that SHE WAS NOT PREGNANT and LIED and HOAXed us with relish -- with the collusion of her handlers, up to and including McCain.

No need to be an expert in legalities or theology or have reams of data and witnesses. Pregnant or not. Liar or not. Simple. Clear.

Anonymous said...

Tina Andreadis is a Harper Collins publicist. I'll bet her work turns into a nightmare when $P goes rogue on the book tour. No doubt they have booked her into some situations she won't be comfortable with, but a contract is a contract.

Anonymous said...

Amy, if you haven't read the Blumenthal book, you'd really think it was good. I watched some of the video, but everything I saw was in the book, too.

Bree Palin said...

Tina Andreadis is the publicist for HarperCollins, not Palin personally.

Anonymous said...

Is Mary Matalin the go to person to confirm that Palin will show up for Oprah? What about Pam Pryor and Meghan Stapleton?

Palin Joins Tabloid Circus: ( Mary Matalin of Dick Cheney fame )
Palin book 'Rogue' expected to do well

Mary Matalin, editor-in-chief of Threshold Editions, said the book that earned the former Republican vice presidential candidate an advance as much as $1.25 million is due for release on Nov. 17 in the wake of additional works about the political figure, McClatchy Newspapers reported Sunday.

Anonymous said...

Amy - your respect for religions will be used against you if Palin ever gets near the Oval office for the very reason that you state, Palin and her backers want to impose Leviticus Law on the rest of us.

Make no mistake about it. These guys have been planning this for the past forty years or so and they see the world economic crisis as the perfect opportunity for them to slip in under cover.

snowbilly said...

The Max Blumenthal video is worthwhile. It puts Sarah Palin in context. If you're in a hurry you can skip up to around before the 1/2 hour mark to hear about Sarah Palin.

Amy1 said...

Thx anon23:52 -- I'm getting it.

Anon23:58 -- Yes, I see that it's a threat by people who are v serious about it. Didn't Rahm Emanuel say "never waste a crisis"? I have almost wondered if this crisis wasn't semi-manufactured by, say, the 10 wealthiest religious right pals. Only it was supposed to hit AFTER the election -- so Obama could be blamed for it and be dumped (if he won) or McCain could be coerced (if he won) -- or actually I assumed that if McCain won he would soon die a surprising and sudden "natural death" and we would have had SP right there, in place, 40 yrs of work come to fruition.

I didn't used to be so nutty unil I started researching this.

Patrick said...

Amy1 and others

I understand that people's religious feelings can easily be offended by such a picture, but I just would like say that the whole point of posting the picture with Sarah Palin as Jesus on the cross was to point out how Sarah Palin herself abuses religion and religious feelings by declaring herself a victim aka martyr each time somebody criticizes her.

Sarah Palin plays the "victim-card" all the time and clearly wants to prevent that any kind of critical questions are being asked to her, because she hides behind her "holier-than-thou" cover. I am pretty sure that we will be able to see this again in the "Oprah" interview.

I can understand that the picture can easily violate religious feelings, but in my opinion it also proved this point quite effectively. I removed the picture in the end because it was too overpowering and it caused much more controversy here than I would have thought. I want to avoid "in-fighting" as much as possible - we all have to remain united in this important and difficult battle.

It's Sarah Palin herself who is really offensive and shamelessly exploits religious and patriotic feelings on a daily basis. I am a bit sad that parodies on religion provoke such strong feelings nowadays, as so many politicians in the USA use religion as a "cover" at the same time.

A real eye-opener in my opinion is this other picture where somebody included real quotes in the horrible painting "One Nation Under God" - here:

Controversial painting “One Nation Under God” with REAL quotes

I wonder whether politicians in the USA today would be able to say similar things - they will most likely keep quiet in order to not upset any of their voters. That's why ultra-religious politicians like Sarah Palin then can have a "free ride", and we should all pray to God, if we believe in him or not, that Sarah Palin will never ever become the President of the United States. If that happened, the Americans would not know what hit them. That's the reason why we all spend so much of our free time in the fight against Sarah Palin, because this woman has to be exposed.

There is a very dangerous movement on the rise in the USA, this whole "back to ancestors and founding fathers" ideology, where at the same time the views and beliefs of the founding fathers are being horribly distorted. I am actually quite pleased the artist painted "One Nation Under God" picture because the picture (especially in connection with the artist's statements on his website) very clearly shows this whole narrow-mindness and hypocrisy of these people, and their will to re-write history. Today I read somewhere that the artist Jon McNaughton painted the picture as a response of his "visions" during the 2008 presidential campaign. It is therefore not a coincidence at all that the school-teacher looks like Sarah Palin, that the little child with the mother is "handicapped" and that the "Liberal News Reporter" looks like Katie Couric.

Anonymous said...

Wow! Tremendous $P video, covers a lot of the issues, here

Anonymous said...

Very interesting comments. I am not going to go to that artist's site, but I appreciate reading comments from others about it.

Personally, I am not offended by religious satire. But if the purpose of this site (forgive me if I'm wrong) is to bring to light Palin's "gates," surely the evidence should be inclusive of all beliefs?

Also, as an author, I would not want my serious essay overshadowed by a satiric artwork. Both should stand alone? I agree that the art, if contextualized with other political art, could be worthy of its own post.

I just watched THE LIFE OF BRIAN again, and I remember when that was considered controversial due to religious content, and it's Monty Python, for goodness sake.

I wish someone would do a post comparing the Sarah Palin story to ELMER GANTRY.

wayofpeace said...

while we're defining political parties, how about reminding ourselves of the core values of our nation:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union,

establish justice,

insure domestic tranquility,

provide for the common defense,

promote the general welfare,

and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity,

do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


which begs the question: which party strives the closest towards these core aspirations?

Anonymous said...

Doug Hoffman looks like Howdy Doody. Who's the ventriloquist?

Anonymous said...

@anon23:36 You seem to be against Sarah's fans throwing money at a state race that has nothing to do with them.

I am the last person to defend Sarah Palin or her fans, but many concerned citizens do exactly that- throw money at races in other states, or should I say, donate to races that they care about, no matter where.

Ever since it was founded, I have been donating to EMILY's list. When organized, it supported women candidates for public office around the US, governor, senator, representative, women needed money because as women, they lacked the power to attract donations in the same way that the male candidates did.

EMILY is an acronym for Early Money is like Yeast--- it makes the dough rise. (By giving her money early in her campaign, a woman candidate would have the funds to raise more money). I receive mailings from EMILY's list, usually around election time describing the women that they support. They generally support Democrats, and people whose philosophy agree with mine. If I don't like a candidate, I am under no obligation to contribute to her. And the amount is also up to me.

I am a strong supporter of woman's rights, and so I was involved in elections outside of my own state, and yes, they were every bit of my business. Over the years, I helped candidates that would not have had as much support, win a few, lose a few, but I'm involved.

With all of that being said, I think the thing that undermines our political system are all of the donations made to candidates in order to run for office. I favor the system in England where the entire election season lasts 4-6 weeks, no advertising, quotes cannot be taken out of context, each candidate is given the same amount (maybe 20 minutes) of air time to make their speech. The candidates are also subjected to questions phone in (or emailed in) from all parts of the country. Questions selected have to represent each demographic in the interest of fairness. Our election process and the money required to run is what's ruining us. (Where is Regina who is more qualified to write about this than I am???)

Anonymous said...

Sarah Palin: Cynical Populist: George Bush in a skirt

Anonymous said...

From 10catsinMD:

Thank you for taking the picture down. It does not go with the article. You needed a strong explanation as to why it was posted and that was not provided.

If the Palinbots want to compare this image to Sarah for shock value, they have it. I don't think we should be just like them.

I do not consider Palin and her followers Christians. More of a cult on the fringes of who knows what.

The way these folks use the bible reminds me of the way I was taught the Baltimore Catechism in first and second grade. But as we grew older, we were taught more and received more explanation about the meanings of statements in the BC. Some learned, some didn't.

I attended a four year catholic university where it was a given that it was healthy to test your faith, to find yourself, and to know your religion at a higher level.

One of the best statements said to me by a learned father was that at the highest levels, most religions seem to blend together in philosophy. That's not the best way to state it, but I believe it's true.

I have seen the other one nation under God picture and, yes, I believe it is very offensive also. But it is less of a single iconic image. It takes some focus and concentration to figure it out. As a political statement it's bizarre and dishonest to those who have done so much to pull this country together.

The crucifixation hits with very strong impact--shock and awe. I think it would really scare Palin if someone asked her to renact the crucifixtion. Or the events leading up to it. The crown of thorns, whips, beatings, etc. She's no martyr. She's a bully. Jesus was a giver about what he believed in. He was not a word salad kind of guy. Sarah P. is taker.

Truth is, Sarah probably couldn't handle one confrontation with her "Herod" even if she got a million bucks from it. She's a wimp.

The article about the political parties is very interesting. there are several things happening here in MD. They are trying to create a third party here. Perhaps I will write more later.

The graphic image took away from the impact of the article.

There have been multiple images on the internet and elsewhere since Bush was elected in 2000. Some of them very creative artistic interpretations of the "new" cultish Christianity. Most of them are political statements.

Anonymous said...

I, for one, appreciated the image of Palin on the cross. I logged on too late to see it on this website but googled the controversial image.

Meaningful art often alienates EVERYONE, and I understand that this one evidently did. But the point was dead-on; This is exactly how the Palin brand has been marketed...a "truth-speaker" being crucified. I think it's important that those who see through Palin understand just how she is viewed by her supporters.

Sickening, but this is it.

snowbilly said...

A Salon article, written just after last years election: The Crucifixion of Sarah Palin.

EyeOnYou said...

Anon @ 1:54,

I think the problem with Sarah and her supporters isn't so much that they are giving money to support a candidate in another state.

I think the problems lies within a) the fact that Sarah is very much a person who cries "States rights" and the states should decide for themselves (which like Newt said, they did and Sarah got involved when she didn't like the outcome) and b) that Sarah's supporters did nothing for Hoffman until Sarah endorsed him. They waited for her command before doing anything, even though they were saying all along she should support him instead of the Rep. nominee. They cheered him on, silently, doing nothing until Sarah made "her" feelings known and then they were donating money to him, supporting him loudly and asking others to do the same.

If Sarah had not given him her support her fans would not have gotten involved like they have.

snowbilly said...

... the rank-and-file activists like Palin because they see themselves in her. More precisely, they see her "persecution" as part of the broader persecution that they themselves allegedly face at the hands of the hated elite (both liberal and Republican establishment elite).

In a sense, she's Jesus -- she's standing in for them, and being crucified for being true to their cause.

The Crucifixion of Sarah Palin.

Anonymous said...

New Blog Post.

midnightcajun said...

Another way in which Sarah is not a libertarian: libertarians are also against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, against torture, etc. The wonderful news site is a libertarian site. Sarah loves all that defense stuff, ya know.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Leah, for sharing your information here, too! And Regina and Patrick, Kathleen, and all others!

This is the oldest existing republic in the world, how awesome is that? A republic governed by consent with a Constitution setting forth a liberal government with liberal principalities, the first in history. How doubly awesome is that? Check it out, that's where freedom of speech and freedom of religion came from, liberal principalities. And yet, there are those who believe they are more patriotic, more righteous than I because I do not believe their doctrines. And there are those who desire to rewrite the Constitution so it will conform to their doctrines.

I heard years ago, someone said communism would take over America without a shot being fired, through the children. At that time, I thought, in their dreams; now, not so much so.

I missed that picture of SP, many have written about here. Glad I did, too, because I thought that picture of her on the head of an angel was insulting enough. Look at her record, her job performance, what puts her up so high and mighty? Only in the minds of those who choose to worship a man or the doctrine of man. I repeat, look at her job performance; would a person who walks with God have such a poor record? She earned criticism, and she has done nothing extraordinary.

That picture Patrick shared, I thought it was disgusting, too. That photo was using the image of Jesus to sell a man's doctrine. Jesus said love thy neighbor as thyself. I don't see that reflected in that image.

Anyway, thanks again, Leah, for all the good work you have done!

Anonymous said...

If she trash Levi, she need BIG mean Levi lie to get pity.