Sarah Palin's "Abortiongate" revisited

I'm going to review Abortiongate in a dispassionate way, without speculation about who fathered Sarah Palin's offspring. (Feel free to do so in the comments...)

In her book Going Rogue, Sarah Palin wrote:

Just before Track was born, Todd and I moved to a small apartment in Wasilla, next door to our good friend Curtis Menard, Jr., who by now was a dentist like his dad. Curtis was like a brother to me. We asked him to be Track's godfather. Todd and I shared one car, and we loved our little life together, though with the Slope and fishing schedule we still didn't see each other very much. We desperately wanted another baby right away, so I was excited when I learned I was pregnant again. We were sure it was another boy, and we decided to call him Tad, a combination of Todd and Track.

I loved the fact we had planned so well and that events were falling neatly into place in our well-ordered lives. Our babies would be a year apart, right on schedule. At the beginning of my second trimester, I went in for my monthly exam. Todd was on the Slope. He had always been good about leaving me short love notes before he left, but as I drove to the doctor's office, his latest played in my head because it had a special addendum: "I love you, Tad!"

At my exam, the doctor listened for the baby's heartbeat. When she didn't smile, I didn't worry; she was known for her mellow demeanor. But I noticed that she kept moving the stethoscope around. And she didn't hand it to me as doctors usually do, so the expectant mother can listen to the sound of life.

"Let's do a quick sonogram," she said.

I agreed, eager to confirm that Tad was a boy - or to be surprised.

We moved to another room, and I lay down on a sheet-covered table. The doctor spread gel on my belly and began sliding the transducer back and forth. I waited for the familiar Shoosh-shoosh-shoosh sound of the baby's beating heart.

But it didn't come. And the sonogram picture looked empty.

The doctor said coldly, "There's nothing alive in there."

Her bluntness shocked me. I felt sick and hollow, and burst into tears.

"You have a couple of choices about getting rid of it," she said. "It." That's what she called our baby, whom we'd been calling Tad for three months.

She went on to explain that I could go home and let "it" pass naturally. Or I could have a D&C.

(...)

Todd flew home to be with me when I had the D&C. When the doctor's bill arrived in our mailbox, it came with a typo. In the box describing the procedure, someone had typed, "Abortion." Instead of starting off with a fresh form, they painted it over with a thin layer of Wite-Out and retyped, "Miscarriage." For some reason it just felt like salt in the wound.


This is a badly embroidered tale, full of inconsistencies and factual errors. Using Wite Out in a medical bill is simply not done, but she went along with her little story anyway.

I received this from a nurse:

The allegation that a medical office covered up 'abortion' with wite-out, and then wrote in 'miscarriage', was another glaring red flag for me. I have never heard of any medical office to ever use wite-out. That is a huge no-no in the medical field. The medical field also does not use the term 'miscarriage'. That is not a medical term. Also, if it was covered up with wite-out, how would she know that it said 'abortion' underneath?

The medical procedure done after a miscarriage or for an elective abortion is a D & C. If any of this happened at all, and with Sarah, you never know, I'll bet this is what it had listed as the procedure done. The paperwork most likely had the procedure as needed to be done due to abortion. I'll bet Sarah didn't realize that this term is also used for 'miscarriage', so she covered up abortion herself and wrote in 'miscarriage'.

If she had a miscarriage, as oppose to an elective abortion, I'm sure she would have called the office and asked (yelled) about abortion being on the paperwork. They would have explained that it is a medical term that is used to discribe the termination of a pregnancy, either voluntarily or accidentally.

If, as she claimed, at an ultrasound, the doctor said, "There is nothing alive in there," she would have had a D&C that would most likely have a ICD 9 code (used by insurance companies) of 637.91. That would be 'Legally unspecified abortion incomplete without complication.'

If it was an elective abortion, the ICD 9 code may have been 635.92 'Legally induced abortion complete without complication.'


From Wikipedia:

In medical (and veterinary) contexts, the word "abortion" refers to any process by which a pregnancy ends with the death and removal or expulsion of the fetus, regardless of whether it is spontaneous or intentionally induced.

A missed abortion is when the embryo or fetus has died, but a miscarriage has not yet occurred. It is also referred to as delayed or missed miscarriage.

I found a forum where women commiserate with each other because they disagree with the medical terminology for miscarriage:

- I had what I call a missed miscarriage at 14 weeks in August. I recently received the hospital bill and it said missed abortion. I wish it wasn't called that, because I'm used to the word abortion meaning a deliberate termination of pregnancy. I wanted my baby so much, I never would have deliberately ended her life.

- Oh, I hated that too. My nurse at my D&C kept saying I had a missed abortion. It was horrible. Every time she went over anything about my procedure she said for my missed abortion. It made me so mad.

- I too hate that having a D&C due to a missed miscarriage is still called an abortion. The word 'abortion' has such a negative connotation. By definition an abortion is the surgical removal of a fetus from the womb - whether it is viable or not....but you would think that knowing the negative association with the word abortion the hospitals would have a different name. My doctor bill listed the procedure that was done - D&C and said nothing about an abortion or a miscarriage. I was okay with that bc that is what was done. I had a D&C. Even thought a D&C is also one of the procedures done in performing an elective abortion (as well as a D&E) I felt much better about the circumstances hot having the word abortion attached to what happened to me.

-My paper said "spontaneous abortion" - I think I will contact the hospital and ask for the word abortion to be removed. I understand it's the medical term but then they need to come up with a better term. Going through a m/c is hard enough, having the doctor and paperwork call it a "spontaneous abortion" is just plain mean and really painful! - Why can doctors not use the term Miscarriage?? I HATE the words Spontaneus Abortion! If I were to read that not knowing what it really meant, I would think that person spontaneously went and had an Abortion.

- I had the exact same thing happen. I lost my baby at 16 weeks and after all the pain I had gone through I got the hospital bill and it said "missed abortion" on it. I cried. It is a horrible term.

- I realize that the term "abortion" is a medical term. My Doctor referred to everything in my paperwork as miscarriage, but instead of the hospital using one of the medical terms for miscarriage such as incomplete abortion, spontaneous abortion or even missed abortion... the receipt they gave me for my co-pay on the day of the D&C states INDUCED abortion... so offensive to me.

- I agree!! It is something that should be renamed. The word to me was hard to hear. It has been over 3 years ago since I miscarried. Those words don't make anything easier when you are trying to heal. I wanted that baby and lost it!! I DID NOT ABORT IT!

Another forum, on Free Republic, describes the word abortion as deeply offensive.

- "He's the kicker though. On the OBGyn's patient paperwork that tells what was done for the visit. It looks to be printed by the hospital group and has little check boxes by each thing an OBGyn would handle. Her miscarriage diagnosis was listed as...SPONTANEOUS ABORTION

While "spontaneous abortion" is semantically correct for some reason it just struck me as highly offensive. Sorry my wife didn't have a "spontaneous abortion". She had a miscarriage. Yes I know I can't do anything about it, and doesn't really matter what the paperwork says. I just wanted to vent. Maybe it's just me. Miscarriage doesn't appear anywhere on the paper."

- "I’m very sorry about your loss, and it’s definitely an unpleasant term to see."

- "You’re not alone in finding it offensive. Years ago, and I mean 24 years ago...I had a miscarriage. Ended up in the ER and they kept referring to me as the “abortion” in bed such and such. It bothered me so much I asked them to quit using the term. They were patronizing explaining that it was what was medically termed a “spontaneous abortion” and I told them I didn’t care, I didn’t want to hear the word again."

One reader some sensible words:

- "Your medical caregivers must use this terminology for correct diagnosis, treatment, billing, and to comply with legal regulations. They do not intend to be offensive by using the term abortion with regard to your loss."

Helping women understand:

Question:

Why Did My Doctor Say My Miscarriage Was an Abortion?

Answer:

The terminology of miscarriages can be confusing at times, and many women are shocked to see the word "abortion" on medical forms or to hear the term from doctors.

Although the practice is changing, many medical texts and medical professionals refer to miscarriages as abortions. The term "spontaneous abortion" generally refers to a miscarriage, or naturally occurring loss of a pregnancy (as opposed to the elective surgically or medically induced abortion of an otherwise viable pregnancy).

One more:

Miscarriage – This word is most often used by the general public to describe the very early delivery or loss of a baby. The mother is in the early or middle stages of pregnancy.

Spontaneous abortion – This is the medical term for miscarriage.

Medical staff wouldn't refer to apendicitis as a tummy ache or describe cystitis as burning pee, so why should they have to replace a technically accurate medical term to placate emotional responses to it?

A woman was no less emotional about the term, but for different reasons:

"Abortion is a very broad term. The pro-life contingent would like you to think it only applies to selfish, irresponsible women, murdering babies out of fear of inconvenience. That's a caricature they have invented to push their own agenda. Many of the women who seek out abortions are women who have been raped, who have learned that their child could not survive, have learned that giving birth could physically and permanently harm them. Or, thanks to newer and vaguer language, women who have already lost the life they were carrying, and need intervention to save their own. I was one of the latter. I hope I will be lucky enough to never be again. But if I am, I hope the insurers don't force me to carry that fetus until I medically harm myself, all for the sake of saying that they do not cover abortion services."

Sarah Palin is well known for using soundbites and various props to create and maintain a certain image in order to further her own political agenda. Her agenda is in great part based on personal issues: Family values (Mama Grizzly), pro-life (Trig), pro-guns (she's a hunter), religion (God makes her decisions), etc.

She must have felt it was necessary to include the Wite Out tale in Going Rogue for some reason. Was it a pre-emptive move because she had an elective abortion (for whatever reason) and it could have been made public?

Recalling the incident after so much "experience" as an elected official, portraying it in such emotional terms and showing her ignorance about medical terminology, seems to be a naive effort to pull at the heart strings of badly informed voters or people with similar emotional experiences. She comes across as a woman with an enormous preoccupation with her own womb, as if her womb alone gave her the necessary credentials to dictate how other women should regard their reproductive equipment.

When Sarah Palin talks about policy, she lies about her record and distorts the facts. So why shouldn't she lie and twist everything when it comes to her personal experiences?


In her political and personal accounts, she resorts to the most simplistic and emotional rhetoric, always shallow and often very much mistaken. It may appeal to her base and to vociferous anti-choice types, but to the reasonably informed voter she comes across as a simpleton.

Politicians often recall personal anecdotes to provide a human touch and to balance an otherwise dull discourse about policy.

In Sarah Palin's case, it's ALL she has to offer and her anecdotes always appear to have multiple layers, with the truth buried somewhere among them...

Attention, Babygate enthusiasts! There's a new post about Sarah Palin's strange pregnancy with Trig by the nurse who sent me the e-mail about the wite-out.

Sarah Palin and Pam Tebow: between "choice" and a hard place

RadarOnline exclusive:

Famed womens' rights campaigner and powerhouse attorney Gloria Allred has joined the ever growing hoard of people angered at the CBS network's decision to allow an pro life ad to air during the upcoming Super Bowl on February 7th.

In the controversial ad, Pam reportedly shares the story of her difficult 1987 pregnancy which occurred when she was working as a missionary in the Philippines. In her harrowing tale she says she fell ill with amoebic dysentery while pregnant and was treated with robust antibiotics, which she says doctors told her had caused fetal damage, prompting them to urge her to terminate her pregnancy, but she refused their advice that she have an abortion for her own safety. Going on to give birth to Tebow, the now-famous quarterback who went on to become a Heisman Trophy winner, leading the Gators to two BCS wins.

Allred's objections stem from dishonest claims in Pam Tebow's story.

In her exclusive interview with RadarOnline.com Allred slams the ad and CBS's decision to air it, pointing out factual inconsistencies with Pam's story. One glaring one is the fact that the act of abortion is totally illegal in the majority Catholic country of the Philippines - under all circumstances including rape and incest, and even without a provision in the circumstance that the mother's life is in danger. The law has been in effect since 1930.

Allred says she believes it an impossible scenario to believe that Philippino doctors would have ever suggested abortion as a viable option for Tebow in the first place. And when you learn that physicians and midwives who perform abortions in the Philippines face six years in prison, and may have their licenses suspended or revoked, and that women who receive abortions - no matter the reason - may be punished with imprisonment for two to six years, it's easy to see why.

Allred warns, "If this ad airs and fails to disclose that abortions were illegal at the time Ms. Tebow made her "choice", then I intend to file a formal complaint of misleading advertising with those federal commissions."

Sarah Palin spoke about the controversial ad with Greta Van Susteren:



The fact remains, Pam Tebow did not make the choice to give birth to her son against medical advice. The only way she could have chosen not to have her baby would have been in an illegal backstreet abortion, risking a prison sentence in a foreign country. She had no legal choice at all. All she had was luck and her son was born healthy. Will the ad reflect that?

Will Sarah Palin continue to praise Ms Tebow's "choice" if the ad turns out to be dishonest?

Sarah Palin, her "friends", her views, daughters and babies... (plus a couple of updates)

Sarah Palin will join the following politicians' campaigns for re-election:

John McCain - Senate, Arizona

Michele Bachmann - Congress, Minnesotta

Rick Perry - Governor, Texas

John McCain must have forgotten what happened last time he campaigned with Sarah Palin. As for the other two, who knows? Bush Sr. is endorsing Hutchison in Texas, it could get quite interesting... Watching Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin together could prove to be much too painful an experience.

+++

Sarah Palin's new truck driving friend seems to be even less classy than Granny Palin when it comes to his family. Scott Brown happily announced that his daughters are available.

Any bidders?

If you want to see more flesh from members of Scott Brown's family, you have to visit Huffington Post who have discovered that Brown's wife had a "raunchy part" in what has to be the most awful video of the 1980s: "The girl with the curious hands" (played by his wife...).

Screenshots (more on Huffington Post):

It's difficult to understand Sarah Palin's enthusiasm for Scott Brown. After all, he was involved in "porn" and was proud of it.


He's also moderately pro-choice:

Abortion

While this decision should ultimately be made by the woman in consultation with her doctor, I believe we need to reduce the number of abortions in America. I believe government has the responsibility to regulate in this area and I support parental consent and notification requirements and I oppose partial birth abortion. I also believe there are people of good will on both sides of the issue and we ought to work together to support and promote adoption as an alternative to abortion.

Sarah Palin's views regarding abortion are much more extreme...

These are snippets from her latest Facebook note:

In the years following Roe, we were told that the issue was no longer open for debate and that we should get over it and move on. But we couldn’t get over the stirrings of our conscience or move on from an issue that cuts to the heart of who we are as a nation.

The pro-life movement is pro-women, and it empowers women with the message that we are strong enough and smart enough to be able to pursue education, vocations and avocations while giving life to a child.

Though I can’t be in Washington tomorrow, my heart is with the marchers. Those of us who can’t be there can still join them online at the Virtual March for Life. Please follow the link and join the tens of thousands of your fellow Americans who are already marching online. Together we can bear witness to the beauty and blessings of the culture of life.

This is what the Virtual March for Life is all about:

Hundreds of thousands of Americans are expected to attend tomorrow's National March for Life, which takes place annually on the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision. Americans United for Life Action, in an effort to bolster the real March for Life, launched the first-ever Virtual March for Life www.virtualmarchforlife.com earlier this week.

List of supporters so far:

• Governor Sarah Palin
• Governor Mike Huckabee
• Dr. James Dobson, Focus on the Family
• Tony Perkins, Family Research Council
• Sen. Jim DeMint
• Rep. John Boehner
• Rep. Mike Pence
• Rep. Eric Cantor
• Rep. Tom Price
• Marco Rubio, U.S. Senate candidate in Florida
• Erick Erickson, RedState.com

+++

In a sequel to their "In Touch" spread, mother and daughter will now appear on Oprah. Will Sarah and Bristol take their babies with them to emphasize the perfect symmetry?



Oops! Not that baby! This is the right one:


Oh, to be a mother...
Unfortunately, our Sarah doesn't appear to have any such feelings...
.

Sarah Palin and the bloggers

Some interesting signs I photographed in Australia... (click to enlarge)

November 2009 was some month! Going Rogue was a gift to palingates in so many ways... We have yet another account of the wild ride from Sarah's own pen (so to speak) and that bizarre story of an abortion turned into a miscarriage courtesy of wite-out on a medical bill!

Thanks to a call-to-action by our no longer resident troll, we (and Celtic Diva) were singled out by Harper Collins for copyright infrigement. Our traffic went through the roof as a result. But the whole thing made me wonder why these two blogs were targeted by HC while all others doing the same thing were left alone. Babygate and ethics violations seem to bother our Sarah more than anything else...

Then came the remarkable team effort that led to a mention on msnbc and links from major MSM players when the fake bus tour was exposed. We even got an oblique reference on Sarah's Facebook page. Not bad, eh? Thanks, Snowbilly.

Another gift to palingates is our very own Patrick. Before he came along, I offered fairly well researched posts with my own commentary on various issues. Patrick is great at breaking news and has put palingates on the larger map. It's a good combination and we have more readers than ever, hopefully going through all the gates and finding the darker side of the quitter governor.

Sarah Palin is very entertaining, there's no question about it. But she left a trail of destruction throughout Alaska, not to mention the damage she inflicts on her own family. On a larger scale, she has become the queen of the teabaggers and helps their racist rants appear legitimate.

Sarah Palin is not intelligent enough to do any of it by herself. But just as in Alaska she had very powerful people calling the shots, now she has other powerful groups using her image and celebrity status to further their own agenda.

Our job is to take their beauty queen away from them. Sarah Palin is much more attractive than GWB and draws very emotional reactions from her followers. But if we show them that saint Sarah is not who they think she is, her puppetmasters will have to start again from scratch and find another muse at short notice.

I believe Sarah Palin will eventually bring herself down because she's a loose cannon and doesn't know when to sit down and shut up.

We just like to lend her a helping hand...
.

"Pinocchio Palin" does it again - Another BIG lie by Sarah Palin in "Going Rogue" exposed! - UPDATE: Andrew Halcro confirms!

Reading "Going Rogue" is a hard job. It's one of the worst books you will ever encounter in your lifetime - it's a real slog. However, sometimes it can be very rewarding to read what "Pinocchio Palin" has to say, because the book contains lie after lie. Today, we found another big, fat, unashamed lie, which serves as an example for the countless other lies and distortions in "Going Rogue".

Starting on page 110 of "Going Rogue", Sarah begins to describe how she ran for the Governorship of Alaska in the years 2005/2006, first in the Republican primaries, then in the general election.

On pages 115 and 116, Sarah Palin writes:

"It wasn't the last time I'd find that there's no better training ground for politics than motherhood. At one point during the general election, motherhood became the focus of a unique line of questioning. In my responses to a series of debate questions on abortion, I remained consistent and sincere, explaining how personal and sensitive the issue is and that good people can disagree.

But the debate moderator decided to personalize his hypotheticals with a series of "What if..." questions. He asked:

"If a woman were, say, raped..."

"...I would choose life."

"If your daughter were pregnant..."

"Again, I would choose life."

"If your teenage daughter got pregnant..."

"I'd counsel a young parent to choose life...consider adoption," I answered.

I calmly repeated my answer to all of his "what-ifs,", then looked pointedly to my right and my left, to one opponent, then the other. Then I returned to the moderator and said, "I'm confident you'll be asking the other candidates these same questions, right?" Of course, he didn't."

Screenshots (click to enlarge):

This is the full account of the TV-debate which Sarah Palin gives on "Going Rogue".

So far, so good. Sarah is treated unfairly again. The moderator viciously singled her out - because she is a mother! But this time, the "gotcha media" didn't get her, because she was strong and "remained consistent and sincere." There you have it, moderator! See what happenes if you try to "personalize" your questions - Sarah calls you out! Of course, the other candidates weren't asked the same questions. Well, the moderator was probably a liberal. Sarah can sniff these people from miles away, can't she?

However, I know that there is something that Sarah Palin has forgotten: The recording of this TV-debate still exists! It has remained buried since November 2006 in this inconspicious internet archive, before it was unearthed and a substantial part of the debate posted on youtube in December 2008.

Apparently the fact-checkers have forgotten to tell Sarah about the existence of the TV-recording. Oh, there were no fact-checkers? Too bad! It's a real shame that Harper Collins has lots of cash readily available to pay for exclusive private jets, but cannot afford to hire fact-checkers!

Here is what REALLY happened in the debate on November 2, 2006. Sarah Palin debates Tony Knowles (Democrat) and Andrew Halcro (Republican, who ran as an Independent for Governor in Alaska in 2006):

Sarah Palin, I have some questions for you - and we all know you read this blog ;-)

Sarah - did the moderator single you out - YES OR NO?

Sarah - did you give the answer in the debate: "I'd counsel a young parent to choose life....consider adoption" - YES OR NO?

Sarah - did you "look pointedly to your right and left, to one opponent, then the other" before asking the moderator whether he will be asking the same questions to the other candidates - YES OR NO?

Sarah - did the moderator then ask your opponents to address the same scenario - YES OR NO?

Sarah - was the discussion ANYTHING like you described in your book - YES OR NO?

Yup Yup, I know the answers - and now everyone else knows.

+++

No wonder that Steve Schmidt said on the record that "Going Rogue" is "not 70%, but 100% fiction!"

+++

SARAH PALIN: STOP LYING! STOP LYING RIGHT NOW!

(this is an ironic reference to an incident described by the New York Times in THIS ARTICLE)

So, what happened there in Sarah's crazy mind? Did she just forget what really happened? I don't think so! I think that she didn't WANT to remember, because at the end of the clip, Andrew Halcro completely blows her out of water, by giving an incredible intelligent and thoughtful answer. Sarah just does what apparently is her strategy throughout the whole book: She gives a "fantasy version" of what really happened, in order to make her look brilliant, to make her look like a victim, to make her look as if she is being singled out because she is a woman and a mother, to make her look as if she actually knows what she is doing, to make her appear as a competent politician.

No wonder that this book has previously received labels like

"TOTAL FICTION"

"FABRICATION"

"GOING ROGUE ON FACTS"

+++

AMERICANS:

DO YOU WANT THIS WOMAN TO BE YOUR PRESIDENT?

REMEMBER: THERE IS NO PROBATIONARY PERIOD FOR THIS POSITION!

US MEDIA:

FACT-CHECKING IS NOT "OPPOSITION-RESEARCH"! DON'T BE INTIMIDATED BY THIS SAD WOMAN AND HER FANATIC SUPPORTERS! EXPOSE HER LIES!

+++

UPDATE:

I have just been in contact with Andrew Halcro, and he has confirmed in an email that the facts of my blog post are correct.

The above video clip is the debate that Sarah Palin references in her book.

Andrew Halcro wrote to me on December 4, 2009:

"Patrick,

Your blog is correct.

If you review what Clark asks her, he wants to know if Palin has any exceptions to her pro-life belief. This is commonly asked of pro-life candidates because many who are pro-life will accept a woman’s right to choose in the case of incest, rape or the life of the mother.

In addition, Knowles and I were pro-choice so there was no reason for them to try and find if we had any “grey” areas on the issue, as one of the moderators (Chris Clark) had asked Palin.

I would also like to point out on more thing; if Clark is the moderator that she is complaining about in her book…she hired him for her press office after she got elected."

+++

I would like to urge all new readers to visit our extensive documentation about Sarah Palin's faked pregnancy with Trig ("babygate")! SEE THIS LINK.

Please click on the title of the blog post or CLICK HERE before using the toolbar below for sharing!

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

Article by Leah Burton - Cross-posted on "www.godsownparty.com"

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):

"Preamble

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):

"Preamble

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.

Will Sarah Palin show up?

Will Sarah Palin make her first appearance in weeks at an event in Anchorage?

The Family Research Council (Defending Faith, Family and Freedom) say she will. (Click on text to enlarge)


Meg Stapleton hasn't denied it, so Sarah must be going to this event and will be the first to sign the petition to make sure that a young girl who's raped by a member of her family will have to ask her abuser for permission to undergo an abortion.

Isn't Sarah Palin a saint?

We'll have to wait and see if she shows up...
.

Sarah Palin and terrorism (update)

The Department of Homeland Security issued an internal report last month, which includes a definition of right-wing extremism:

A movement of rightwing groups or individuals who can be broadly divided into those who are primarily hate-oriented, and those who are mainly antigovernment and reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority. This term also may refer to rightwing extremist movements that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

Antigovernment conspiracy theories and “end times” prophecies could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition, and weapons.

Dr. George Tiller was murdered entering his church in Wichita, Kansas on Sunday, May 31, 2009. His clinic performed late term abortions.

George Tiller was forced to install bullet proof glass at his clinic for protection. He was shot in both arms in 1993. Tiller’s clinic was bombed in 1995. Tiller often traveled with a bodyguard for protection.

In 2007, Dr. Tiller's facility was attacked by vandals who cut a hole in the ceiling, inserted a garden hose, and flooded part of the facility with several inches of water. They also attempted to seal the gates of the parking lot.

Since 1973, three physicians and four clinic workers in the U.S. have been killed by anti-abortion extremists. Five other physicians or clinic workers have been seriously injured in such attacks.

Police have arrested a suspect in the shooting of Dr Tiller, a Scott P. Roeder.

Those who know Roeder told The Kansas City Star that he believed killing abortion doctors was an act of justifiable homicide.

“I know that he believed in justifiable homicide,” said Regina Dinwiddie, a Kansas City abortion opponent who made headlines in 1995 when a federal judge ordered her to stop using a bullhorn within 500 feet of any abortion clinic. “I know he very strongly believed that abortion was murder and that you ought to defend the little ones, both born and unborn.”

Roeder was a subscriber to Prayer and Action News, a magazine that advocated the justifiable homicide position, said publisher Dave Leach, an abortion opponent from Des Moines, Iowa.

In recent years, someone using the name Scott Roeder had posted anti-Tiller comments on various Internet sites. One post, dated Sept. 3, 2007, and placed on a site sponsored by Operation Rescue called ChargeTiller.com, said that Tiller needed to be “stopped.”

On May 19, 2007, a person using the name Scott Roeder commented on an invitation by Operation Rescue to join an event being held May 17-20 in Wichita, “the ‘Nation’s Abortion Capital:

The post said: “(Bless) everyone for attending and praying in May to bring justice to Tiller and the closing of his death camp."




Sarah Palin says Bill Ayers was a domestic terrorist who bombed the Pentagon and other buildings.

In November 2008, Ayers told The New Yorker:

"While we did claim several extreme acts, they were acts of extreme radicalism against property,” and “We killed no one and hurt no one. Three of our people killed themselves.”

In an op-ed piece in the NYT, Bill Ayers stated:

"The Weather Underground went on to take responsibility for placing several small bombs in empty offices.... We did carry out symbolic acts of extreme vandalism directed at monuments to war and racism, and the attacks on property, never on people, were meant to respect human life and convey outrage and determination to end the Vietnam war."

Sarah Palin went on and on and on about president Obama's association with Bill Ayers during her vice presidential campaign, painting Ayers as Satan personified... for attacks on property, not people.

Yet she fails to see the anti-abortion groups that carry out similar attacks on property as domestic terrorists, even though people died or suffered terrible injuries in some of the incidents.

Sarah Palin's Twitter page doesn't show anything in reference to Dr Tiller's murder so far.

Sarah Palin's constant disrespect and aversion to the federal government, her association with end times churches and radical anti-abortion stance, coupled with inflammatory or deeply divisive rhetoric make her a much bigger threat to the country than Bill Ayers ever was.

UPDATE: Sarah Palin released a statement on SarahPac:

Governor Palin Statement on George Tiller

"I feel sorrow for the Tiller family. I respect the sanctity of life and the tragedy that took place today in Kansas clearly violates respect for life. This murder also damages the positive message of life, for the unborn, and for those living. Ask yourself, 'What will those who have not yet decided personally where they stand on this issue take away from today's event in Kansas?'

Regardless of my strong objection to Dr. Tiller's abortion practices, violence is never an answer in advancing the pro-life message."

It seems Sarah Palin is worried about the impact the murder will have on the pro-life movement. Other pro-lifers were more vocal and expressed their worries more openly.

Randall Terry, who runs "Operation Witness", an anti-abortion group, is concerned "that the Obama Administration will use Tiller's killing to intimidate pro-lifers."
.

Sarah Palin, Rick Perry and the victims of rape

Alaska governor Sarah Palin has a lot in common with Rick Perry, governor of Texas. They're both against stimulus money, have secessionist tendencies and now they have another link: Texas is following in the famous mayor of Wasilla footsteps by charging victims for their rape kits.

Of course Sarah Palin denied that she approved of this practice when confronted with the facts that were surfacing during the vice presidential campaign, but she was the boss and had appointed the police chief who defended charging rape victims to the bitter end, even as it was being outlawed by the Alaska Legislature...

There's speculation about Sarah Palin's motives for condoning this insult to rape victims: the kits include the "morning after" pill and it goes against her anti-abortion beliefs. Don't forget that she believes that victims of rape and incest should bear and give birth to the offspring of their attackers. In her mind, only pro-life governors of state have the choice to forego an abortion, even if the baby is her husband's or not her baby at all.





There's an excellent article about the Wasilla rape kits on alternet.org and another one on Feministe.

Mother Jones , Think Progress and HuffPo have articles about the Texas rape kits.

(Thanks for the tip, Sue.)
.

Sarah Palin, life and intolerance

Abortion is a very divisive issue. It elicits very strong emotions from people and objectivity quickly goes out of the window in any discussions about the subject.

What makes people pro-life? Do pro-lifers really believe in the sanctity of ALL life?

Unless we consider psychopaths who kill for kicks, I would say that EVERYBODY is pro-life. I haven't yet met a woman who had an abortion for fun. It's a very difficult decision to make, having an abortion.

Women don't walk into an abortion clinic thinking "What a fantastic time I'm having today, I must have another abortion in a few months and tell all my friends not to miss it for the world!"

The doctors who perform abortions don't look at a pregnant woman and rub their hands together: "Wow, I'm going to have a whale of a time putting an end to this pregnancy!"

It doesn't work that way. A woman facing an unwanted pregnancy will ask herself many, many questions.

Can I provide for this child? Can I go through the whole nine months and give the baby away for adoption? What will my life be like with this baby? What will life be like for this baby? Do I have the right to end this life? Do I have the right to bring a baby into this world in these circumstances?

Other women face harder questions. Do I have to carry my rapist's child? Do I have to give birth to my own father's baby? Is it right to give birth to my brother's baby?

Life is precious, yes. Women who opt for an abortion are aware of that. But they also have the concept of quality of life. They have a deep respect for life and choose not to bring a child into this world with the odds stacked against a child they feel they can't have.

Some young women are not prepared to embark into motherhood or the psychological damage caused by carrying a baby to term then having to give it away, left with engorged breasts and an emptiness that could last a lifetime. Their lives are precious too.

Women are not receptacles for breeding babies. Their lives are just as valuable as those of the foetuses they choose to terminate after asking themselves very difficult questions. They are alive now, the women already here, aren't their lives worth anything?

Pro-lifers who demonize women who choose abortion don't respect life. If they did, they would respect all life and would consider the quality of the lives about which they make such a fuss. Many pro-lifers are passionate advocates for the death sentence...

They love to ask "When does life start?" Why don't they ask themselves "When does life cease to be precious?"

The lives they so passionately defend in the womb seem to be less sacred to them when children forced to be born into disfunctional families are given the label of disruptive, taken into care and drugged to their eyeballs to keep them under control. They are the first ones to say that children don't have rights.

When things go all pear shaped for the children they fought so hard to bring into being, they're not so vocal about the rights of the very same children. Right to life? How about the right to quality of life?

The governor who makes such a good case for life and would love to bring about legislation to ensure that all babies are born, regardless of the circumstances surrounding their conception, also believes that conception should be left to chance or willpower.

A person who loves life would work towards less women and young girls finding themselves in the position of having to make such difficult choices. To be able to make decisions on behalf of other people one has to look at reality and not be guided by the tenets of an intolerant church.

Being pro-life should be about respecting other women's difficult decisions without prejudice and not trivializing the whole issue by branding people as good or bad based on a very narrow set of beliefs.

Life is very precious, but it's not simple and people don't need simplistic policies and legislation.
.

Sarah Palin whines again

Sarah Palin is backing a ballot measure to bypass the Legislature and make it illegal for teenagers to get an abortion without telling their parents.

The governor said the only reason she's not sponsoring the initiative herself is not to give ammunition to her critics.

"I got a preliminary opinion from Law (Department) just giving me a heads up that critics would certainly file an ethics charge against me if I were to sponsor an initiative. So though I maintain I have First Amendment rights just as any other citizen does, I won't flirt with the notion of giving critics more ammunition to keep filing wasteful ethics charges against me, but instead I'll volunteer to be the first signature."

Sarah Palin is in hot water for speaking out against Ballot 4, relating to Pebble Mine and the Clean Water Act, which is the reason she started claiming her First Amendment rights, blah blah.

There's a world of difference between the two ballot initiatives. Pebble Mine stood to make huge financial gains by defeating the environmentalists. They spent $12 million dollars between what could be seen as bribes and publicity in order to secure a "No" vote. Sarah Palin's endorsement of their views clinched the deal.

On the other hand, in this abortion initiative nobody will make any money, there are no financial interests involved. The people who would gain from it are controlling parents who don't have proper dialogue with their daughters and abusive fathers who would feel their abuse is validated by the state.

Article, Miami Herald
.

Sarah Palin's church buddies

Continuing on the theme of Sarah Palin's buddies, let's leave her high school and move on to her church.

During the time Sarah Palin was mayor, her church became involved in taking over the board of the local hospital, Mat-Su Providence. The more conservative, fundamentalist churches, over a period of three or four years, were able to elect and control the operating board of the hospital. At the first meeting where they had control, they passed a resolution ending all abortions at the hospital. The Wasilla Assembly of God and its membership were a key leader in this group.

Dr. Susan Lemagie, a Palmer OB-GYN, fought back, filing suit on behalf of a local woman who had been forced to travel to Seattle for an abortion. The case was finally decided by the Alaska Supreme Court, which ruled that the hospital must provide valley women with the abortion option.

The Alaska Supreme Court held unconstitutional a state law that permitted hospitals to refuse to provide abortion services.

"The reasons a doctor and patient choose a medical procedure, so long as it is legal, must not be subject to the approval of hospital's board of directors, according to their own values."

This happened before Sarah Palin had the power to appoint her people to various positions all over the state, but surely she used her influence as mayor of Wasilla so her church could gradually take over the board of the local hospital. Now that she's the governor and can hire and fire at her pleasure, things must be a lot worse.

Luckily for the women of Mat-Su Valley, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled against the hospital board of directors.

Don't forget that she has now appointed a judge who's more to her liking to the Supreme Court.

How long before this issue of banning abortions rears its ugly head again?

Image: Jaques Callot, 1630
.