In a radio interview, she suddenly "goes birther", as the Daily Kos and Politico have reported. Sarah says that the question of Obama's birth certificate is a "fair question" and she says that she herself has "provided Trig's birth certificate"!
No, Sarah, you have never provided Trig's birth certificate! Have you forgotten to take your meds today? Did you provide Trig's birth certificate in the "fantasy world" you live in?
You didn't provide Trig's birth certificate because you didn't give birth to Trig, and the birth certificate doesn't show what it's "supposed to show"!
Sarah Palin made the remarks while speaking to conservative talker Rusty Humphries:
Transcript:
PALIN: I think the public rightly is still making it an issue. I don’t have a problem with that. I don’t know if I would have to bother to make it an issue because I think there are enough members of the electorate that still want answers.
HUMPHRIES: Do you think it’s a fair question to be looking at?
PALIN: I think it’s a fair question just like I think past associations and past voting records. All of that is fair game. You know, I’ve got to tell you too, I think our campaign, the McCain-Palin campaign didn’t do a good enough job in that area. We didn’t call out Obama and some of his associates on their records and what their beliefs were, and perhaps what their future plans were, and I don’t think that was fair to voters to not have done our job as candidates and a campaign to bring to light a lot of things that now we’re seeing manifest in the administration.
HUMPHRIES: I mean, truly if your past is fair game and your kids are fair game, certainly Obama’s past should be. I mean, we want to treat men and women equally, right?
PALIN: Hey, you know, that’s a great point. And that weird conspiracy theory freaky thing that people talk about that Trig isn’t my real son, and a lot of people that went "Well, you need to produce his birth certificate, you need to prove that he’s your kid," which we have done, but yeah, so maybe we can reverse that, and use the same [inaudible] thinking on the other one.
[Note: Final sentence of transcript edited for accuracy.]"
The Huffington Post currently reports the story on their frontpage:
In response to these reports, Sarah has just released a statement on facebook called "Stupid Conspiracies"- and it gets worse:
Today at 10:16pm
The Ethos of Ethics
Today at 4:11pm
When the Governor announced her decision to resign on July 3, she pointed out the then 15 frivolous ethics complaints that had been filed against her and dismissed. It was intended to explain, in part, her decision to resign as well to educate the public about the abuse of the Alaska Ethics Act through a repetitive stream of baseless partisan accusations, each one seemingly more pointless and frivolous than the next. The Governor’s message was not intended as an invitation to run off half-cocked and file more baseless ethics complaints, but not everyone understood that message—or wanted to understand. In August 2009, largely in response to the abuse of Alaska’s Ethics Act by partisan shills and low level lackeys, the Attorney General issued an opinion recommending changes to the Ethics Act ”to prevent another potential harm—abuse of the process. Some Alaskans have argued that the Ethics Act has been used inappropriately in some circumstances to politically damage the subject of the complaint.” (August 5, 2009 Attorney General Opinion). That argument was asserted by the Anchorage Daily News. “Our View: Abuse of Ethics Complaints Turns Good Law Into Bad Politics,” Anchorage Daily News, May 3, 2009. The Attorney General further recommended “another safeguard to discourage habitual complaint filers who use the Ethics Act process to harass executive branch employees. Statutory amendments could provide authority to the personnel board to decline to process further complaints filed by a person who has abused the Act in this way.” Though it is encouraging to see an impartial evaluation of the problem, it is ultimately up to the Legislature to implement any of these recommended changes. Governor Palin has been subjected to 24 ethics complaints, several lawsuits, and dozens and dozens of public information act requests, few of which raised even a scintilla of a good faith issue, and most of which were simply done to garner a headline or promote opposition research for political gain.
Recently we learned that two more ethics complaints against Governor Palin have been dismissed—complaints that were filed after the Governor announced her plans to step down. One complaint asserted that it was unethical for the state to follow its own per diem regulations and pay per diem to the Governor as set forth by law. Of course, the complainant conveniently overlooked that the Governor and her family received less per diem than they were entitled to under State law—why let such details stand in the way of an ethics complaint? The other complaint that was dismissed asserted that the Governor, through me, supposedly violated the constitution because we informed a person who falsely implied that the Governor was “under investigation” by the FBI, that such statements are defamatory. It is notable to watch those who agitate on all things Palin—locally and even across the Atlantic—as they Huff and puff falsehoods about Sarah Palin under the guise of free speech, which brings us to a teachable moment. All too often we hear about constitutional rights—as we should—but many forget about constitutional responsibilities. As citizens we have both rights and responsibilities. Though we have the right to exercise free speech, we have the responsibility to exercise that right without defaming people. I like the way our Alaska Constitution describes it: “Every person may freely speak, write, and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right.” Ak. Const. Art. I, Sec. 5. The irony of filing an ethics complaint because of a reminder about the constitutional parameters of free speech is no doubt lost on those consumed by irrationality when it comes to Sarah Palin; but one does not need an ethics law to know that positive political discourse depends on a robust debate about facts and the policy implications stemming from such facts. The nation is not helped by calumnious ad hominem attacks against Sarah Palin, matrilineal conspiracy theories, and aberrant notions of ethics.
- Thomas Van Flein, Personal Attorney for Sarah Palin
"Matrilineal conspiracy theories?" I have just learned a new word!
People "across the Atlantic?" That's us, that's Palingates!
"HUMPHRIES: Sarah Palin here on the Rusty Humphries Show. One of the questions Jason asks is would you make the birth certificate an issue if you ran?
PALIN: I think the public rightly is still making it an issue. I don’t have a problem with that. I don’t know if I would have to bother to make it an issue because I think there are enough members of the electorate that still want answers.
HUMPHRIES: Do you think it’s a fair question to be looking at?
PALIN: I think it’s a fair question just like I think past associations and past voting records. All of that is fair game. You know, I’ve got to tell you too, I think our campaign, the McCain-Palin campaign didn’t do a good enough job in that area. We didn’t call out Obama and some of his associates on their records and what their beliefs were, and perhaps what their future plans were, and I don’t think that was fair to voters to not have done our job as candidates and a campaign to bring to light a lot of things that now we’re seeing manifest in the administration.
HUMPHRIES: I mean, truly if your past is fair game and your kids are fair game, certainly Obama’s past should be. I mean, we want to treat men and women equally, right?
PALIN: Hey, you know, that’s a great point. And that weird conspiracy theory freaky thing that people talk about that Trig isn’t my real son, and a lot of people that went "Well, you need to produce his birth certificate, you need to prove that he’s your kid," which we have done, but yeah, so maybe we can reverse that, and use the same [inaudible] thinking on the other one.
[Note: Final sentence of transcript edited for accuracy.]"
The Huffington Post currently reports the story on their frontpage:
In response to these reports, Sarah has just released a statement on facebook called "Stupid Conspiracies"- and it gets worse:
"Stupid Conspiracies
Voters have every right to ask candidates for information if they so choose. I’ve pointed out that it was seemingly fair game during the 2008 election for many on the left to badger my doctor and lawyer for proof that Trig is in fact my child. Conspiracy-minded reporters and voters had a right to ask... which they have repeatedly. But at no point – not during the campaign, and not during recent interviews – have I asked the president to produce his birth certificate or suggested that he was not born in the United States."
Now she has taken her meds again and has realised what utter crap she had said on the air. Too late, dear Sarah!
But it gets even better: Thomas Van Flein has now gone where no lawyer has gone before: on facebook!
He writes:
Today at 4:11pm
When the Governor announced her decision to resign on July 3, she pointed out the then 15 frivolous ethics complaints that had been filed against her and dismissed. It was intended to explain, in part, her decision to resign as well to educate the public about the abuse of the Alaska Ethics Act through a repetitive stream of baseless partisan accusations, each one seemingly more pointless and frivolous than the next. The Governor’s message was not intended as an invitation to run off half-cocked and file more baseless ethics complaints, but not everyone understood that message—or wanted to understand. In August 2009, largely in response to the abuse of Alaska’s Ethics Act by partisan shills and low level lackeys, the Attorney General issued an opinion recommending changes to the Ethics Act ”to prevent another potential harm—abuse of the process. Some Alaskans have argued that the Ethics Act has been used inappropriately in some circumstances to politically damage the subject of the complaint.” (August 5, 2009 Attorney General Opinion). That argument was asserted by the Anchorage Daily News. “Our View: Abuse of Ethics Complaints Turns Good Law Into Bad Politics,” Anchorage Daily News, May 3, 2009. The Attorney General further recommended “another safeguard to discourage habitual complaint filers who use the Ethics Act process to harass executive branch employees. Statutory amendments could provide authority to the personnel board to decline to process further complaints filed by a person who has abused the Act in this way.” Though it is encouraging to see an impartial evaluation of the problem, it is ultimately up to the Legislature to implement any of these recommended changes. Governor Palin has been subjected to 24 ethics complaints, several lawsuits, and dozens and dozens of public information act requests, few of which raised even a scintilla of a good faith issue, and most of which were simply done to garner a headline or promote opposition research for political gain.
Recently we learned that two more ethics complaints against Governor Palin have been dismissed—complaints that were filed after the Governor announced her plans to step down. One complaint asserted that it was unethical for the state to follow its own per diem regulations and pay per diem to the Governor as set forth by law. Of course, the complainant conveniently overlooked that the Governor and her family received less per diem than they were entitled to under State law—why let such details stand in the way of an ethics complaint? The other complaint that was dismissed asserted that the Governor, through me, supposedly violated the constitution because we informed a person who falsely implied that the Governor was “under investigation” by the FBI, that such statements are defamatory. It is notable to watch those who agitate on all things Palin—locally and even across the Atlantic—as they Huff and puff falsehoods about Sarah Palin under the guise of free speech, which brings us to a teachable moment. All too often we hear about constitutional rights—as we should—but many forget about constitutional responsibilities. As citizens we have both rights and responsibilities. Though we have the right to exercise free speech, we have the responsibility to exercise that right without defaming people. I like the way our Alaska Constitution describes it: “Every person may freely speak, write, and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right.” Ak. Const. Art. I, Sec. 5. The irony of filing an ethics complaint because of a reminder about the constitutional parameters of free speech is no doubt lost on those consumed by irrationality when it comes to Sarah Palin; but one does not need an ethics law to know that positive political discourse depends on a robust debate about facts and the policy implications stemming from such facts. The nation is not helped by calumnious ad hominem attacks against Sarah Palin, matrilineal conspiracy theories, and aberrant notions of ethics.
- Thomas Van Flein, Personal Attorney for Sarah Palin
"Matrilineal conspiracy theories?" I have just learned a new word!
People "across the Atlantic?" That's us, that's Palingates!
Hello, Sarah and Mr Van Flein! (big wave across the atlantic!)
+++
Sarah Palin:
1. You have not given birth to Trig - this is a FACT, and no facebook statement will ever be able to change that!
2. You have never provided Trig's birth certificate or any other proof that Trig is your biological son, and you never will!
3. You are finished!
Please click on the title of the blog post and CLICK HERE before using the toolbar below for sharing!
