Musings on the art of commenting

Do you love your freedom?

Those of us who spend a lot of time on the internet encounter many different things. Some sites are simply functional or informative. Others express opinions and invite debate - or not.

The blogosphere, by and large, involves some degree of debate. In recent months, sites like the Huffington Post have changed the way the comments are moderated and that doesn't sit very well with the more outspoken readers. Some sites have rules, others don't.

The diversity in approach to comments around the internet made me think of how things are on our very own Palingates. When I started it all those months ago, I was an avid reader of Palin Deceptions, a very moderated blog, and I thought moderation was the "in" thing to do. So I clicked on the corresponding alternative when setting up the blog parameters. It lasted about one week. I couldn't be bothered to moderate the comments and didn't see the point of it. The moderation feature came off and things ran very smoothly until a certain spammer reared his head. Long excerpts from a critique of Don Quixote were posted hundreds of times on several threads. I have nothing against Cervantes (far from it), but these comments were posted as an attack on Palingates, with the single aim of disrupting the discussions. Blogger didn't offer appropriate tools to solve this problem, so we deleted the spammy comments manually and switched to Disqus.

We still don't have moderation, but can cope with malicious attacks without having to waste time and without interrupting the discussion. It was a very good decision. The threads became more fluid, the debate more dynamic and the number of people joining in multiplied over the weeks. Trolls don't last very long and there's no need to ban anybody for dissenting opinions. Commercial spammers are swiftly dispatched and our readers are spared some very corny jokes and raunchy videos from a Swedish site, among offers for laptops, IT solutions and anatomy enhancing products.

Just as a matter of curiosity, these are our internal rules:

• Spammers and malicious impersonators are banned. Malicious impersonators are those who appropriate regular commenters usernames and post comments that confuse the discussion. Others post under several different monickers in an attempt to validate their previous comments. These are called out, but not necessarily banned. Once their game is up, they leave on their own accord.
• Comments containing personal contact details are deleted. In the case of our own regular commenters, it's for safety reasons and anybody who wishes to get in touch with each other via e-mail is encouraged to contact Patrick, who will facilitate it. Contact details for third parties are not published if there's a risk of backlash against the person concerned. Media, government bodies and organisations contacts are OK.
• Flagged comments are considered and discussed a case at a time.
  

The opinions of the blog owners are expressed in the main articles and the comments posted through Disqus express the commenters personal opinions. The responsibility for main posts rests with the named authors and the responsibility for Disqus comments rests with each individual. There is a note on the sidebar explaining this.

On very rare occasions, comments are flagged as inappropriate. We look at each case as they arise. We have to balance some things out before making any decisions. If we delete a particular comment, will it affect the flow of the conversation? Are we disrespecting someone's opinions? In the convivial atmosphere at Palingates, sometimes a "just for fun" moment can create a conundrum for us. We have many journalists visiting the blog, looking for solid information about Sarah Palin. The numbers are bound to grow after we won the award for best political blog. If a comment or a picture attached to a comment is posted for fun but would make a wrong impression, we think it's better if it's not there. In such cases we always contact the person who left the comment or picture to explain why we have deleted it.

We understand that our lack of rules may be confusing at times, but it's very difficult to establish criteria that's waterproof. Most of the time things work very well.

We don't have filters, but every now and then Disqus decides to swallow random comments for no good reason. When we spot these, they're quickly approved. Considering that we have over ten thousand comments each week, sometimes it's a bit tricky to keep on top of Disqus's idiosyncrasies... 99.9% of the time, if a comment disappears, it's not due to moderation.

Palingaters are very busy people and the comments come in thick and fast. It's a very mixed bag. We have networkers, link providers, deep thinking people, irreverent people, short commenters, lurkers, occasional trolls, you name it, we have it. Seriousness, snark, humour, concern for each other are all present every single day and provide the unique flavour of Palingates. I've noticed that when Sarah Palin or her "perfect" family are particularly irritating, the tone of the comments changes slightly and the language becomes a bit blue. Again, each comment is considered individually and addressed from the point of view of adding to the discussion or not. I also noticed that when things get too heated, people post soothing youtube videos, which are much appreciated as a mental health break.

Of course this amount of freedom is not to everybody's taste. The trolls themselves don't know how to cope with it. They come from sites where people are ordered "to leave my blog, motherf&*%#r!," which would never happen on Palingates.

We love our freedom and on the rare occasions when we have to look at a comment more closely and make a decision, we always ask ourselves if we are suppressing ideas and opinions. An open forum shifts some of the responsibilty regarding how things are presented, but we're still responsible for the overall "image" of Palingates.

Let me finish on a light note. Poor Track went all the way to Eye-rack to fight for the 1st Amendment and it would be very sad if we didn't show how much we love our freedom and value the freedom of others...

Eye-rack?

The unreality of Sarah Palin's Alaska

As the series Sarah Palin's Alaska continues, with seven episodes aired and a bumper episode to go, many questions were raised, about the narrative and about what we see on the screen. Of course the whole series was planned beforehand and each episode focuses on members of Sarah's family, always showing her in the best possible light (according to Sarah and her fantasies about herself and her family).

We saw Sarah climbing Denali, fishing, kayaking, shooting anything that moves, hunting, riding ATVs, driving her own car... or have we?

Some of her driving raised questions, as Piper was sitting in the backseat without a seatbelt, piping in, criticizing Sarah's driving. Have a look at these screenshots and ask yourself: "Where's the camera?" (The first two shots are from the first leg of the day's travels and Piper was sitting in the front, wearing a seatbelt.)





The idea behind any film, fiction or reality, is to make the viewer forget that there are cameras and great number of people involved in each scene. Are we to believe that there are miniature cameramen especially recruited to film driving scenes? This is how it's usually done:



The car to be filmed is mounted on a low towing dolly and pulled by a camera truck. For safety reasons, there may be troopers' cars in front and behind the car with the "star."

Alternatively, these contraptions may be used, but the car is then towed by a truck and the cameras operated remotely:

Inside the camera truck there's a computarized monitor and the director has full control of each camera:


There we have it: a "natural" driving scene. Piper was told to look bored and say something about Sarah's "driving," so it would tie in with Sarah's little narrative about Piper having changed and no longer being enthusiastic about spending time with mom.

Bear in mind that there is a lot of waiting around for all the gear to be set up and any scene has a number of takes. By the time Piper managed to get her lines right she was probably very bored indeed...

Whether Sarah's car or the giant RV were towed or not, the fact remains that the whole contraption is still a collection of moving vehicles and seatbelts should have been worn. Can you imagine what could have happened if a moose had dashed in front of the whole convoy?

The point of this technical post about a trivial driving scene is to highlight the unreality of this series. There's nothing wrong with using all the techniques available to film makers in order to achieve a seamless result and grab the attention of the viewers without any distractions.

But the whole narrative is dishonest. This series was put together to show Sarah's version of reality. She wanted to show that there aren't any challenges she won't embrace. Any outdoor pursuit, any highly specialized trade (wow!), Sarah can do it. She assigned herself the task of protecting Kate Gosselin and her brood because she's a sharp shooter. Kate left the camping site because that was her script. Kate was the vulnerable city girl against Sarah's fearless frontier woman. She created a tale of hunting in a remote spot, where only one person could be transported on the plane at any one time. The crew with all their paraphernalia must have teleported to that spot, yes? Willow's boyfriend "sneaked" upstairs, past the whole crew, because he was told to do it. Willow smashed Piper face into the cake because... you guessed, she was told to do just that. Willow's car "crash" was all fiction, probably filmed with a double.

In the unscripted bits, Sarah Palin used her "travelogue" to issue a number of jabs aimed at her neighbour, Michelle Obama, bloggers... the list is long. These are some of the moments that can be taken at face value - Sarah unplugged. That's how she unwittingly confirmed the National Enquirer stories about her unruly children.

Another thing she tried to do was attempt to correct her "refudiate" gaffe. She claims that she intended to type "d" and hit "f" instead. What was Sarah trying to type? Redudiate? Repupiate? The fact is, she committed the "typo" on Hannity days before she tweeted it. His voice after she said it barely disguises his embarrassement:



I could go on, but I'm not going to analize each episode from a technical perspective or dissect the narrative of each week's episode. All I can say is that what Sarah Palin chose to show as a normal family, with their troubles and tribulations, was scripted and acted by her prop family and other unsuspecting incidental actors (cousin Matthew, for one) to make her appear normal and loving in her family life and a superwoman the rest of the time. The only real thing is Sarah Palin in full narcissistic glory and nobody seems to have attempted to stop her. Maybe they tried and failed.

All this idiotic make-believe with the beautiful state of Alaska in the background - just another useful prop.

UPDATE

Some readers pointed out that the driving scene could have been filmed using the same type of set-up as in the program Cash Cab, where tiny cameras are mounted where needed. It's very possible that TLC did the scene this way, in which case we have to assume that Sarah was really driving while being filmed, not concentrating a 100% and had her 9 year old daughter sitting in the back, unrestrained. It looks bad either way.

The post may not show exactly how it was filmed, but it's an illustration of how unreal the things we see on TV on a daily basis really are. It's an encouragement not to take the end product at face value, especially when the narrative is so dishonest.

Unfortunately, there's hardly anything left on TV that can be taken at face value. Even "live" news reports can be stage-managed these days, but perhaps that's a subject for another post.
.

Sarah Palin's fans want to censor comedian Andy Borowitz on PBS - He insulted the Queen by making fun of her! UPDATE! "America By Heart" contest!

The Palinbots are after comedian Andy Borowitz!

Andy likes to make fun of Wasilli Vanilli, for example on Huffington Post, on his website and on segments at PBS:

Watch the full episode. See more Need To Know.

Excerpt:

"Her first official act will be to cancel the agreement between nouns and verbs. Next, she’s replace the English language with Palinese….Word number one: “mitteracy.” “Mitteracy” means the ability to read off one’s hand. Word number two: “rignorance.” “Rignorance” means advocating deep-water drilling in the aftermath of an ecological disaster that killed thousands of pelicans. And finally, “mooseacre.” “Mooseacre” means a really fun day in the great outdoors. That’s our lesson in Palinese for today. Now, you may be wondering: Where does Sarah Palin find all these new words of hers? In a little book called the fictionary."

Such dose of witty, but also quite harmless fun is apparently already enough to set the Palinbots off. The Queen has been insulted! Off with his head!

The Palinbots started to complain to PBS that Borowitz insulted the Queen!

Andy Borowitz reports the events on his twitter:

Andy asks for his fans to support him:

You can support Andy Borowitz and write to the PBS ombudsman HERE!

This episode shows again that the Palinbots are just as thin-skinned as their Queen.

And even though they regard Sarah as their Queen, they obviously have never heard of the concept of a jester. ;-)

There shall be no fun made in Sarah's lands about her! There is nothing funny about Sarah Palin! Why does the lamestream media not understand? Making jokes about Sarah is socialist and subversive!

What's next, a boycott of PBS? ;-)

+++

UPDATE:

The Queen meanwhile shows off her patriotic fashion accessories on her new book cover - one flag is apparently not enough:

We already have the first parody cover!

Our brilliant reader disqusux created this cover:

It's so subtle, at first I didn't even see the difference! ;-)

This gave us the idea to officially announce the

*** Palingates "America By Heart"

parody cover contest! ***

Many of our readers will remember that our readers created hilarious parodies in our "Going Rogue blingee contest" last year. But we don't want to restrict this new competition to blingee covers (see the blingee website for more info), so all parodies are welcome!

Please send your submissions with your username to:

patrickpalingates@gmail.com

We will start to present the submissions next week.

That will be fun! :-)

.

Sarah Palin's week in pictures

It's been an interesting week for Sarah Palin in Wasilla. She signed books, banned people from her book signing and served Christmas dinner to the less fortunate...

Let the pictures tell the story.

Sarah signing books, helped by Todd and Juanita Fuller

Some people were allowed in and distributed pamphlets, posters, gathered signatures for petitions and had a jolly good time.

(Photos by Bill Hess)

(Photo by Kim Chatman)

Others weren't so lucky. Todd provided a list of people who weren't welcome at the Curtis D. Menard Memorial Sports Center.

There were four names on Todd's list. Gryphen and Dennis showed up, the others didn't.

Gryphen, from Immoral Minority

Dennis Zaki and Shannyn Moore

Andree McLeod was too busy to attend

One person wasn't prevented from entering the sports center, but her signs were confiscated and destroyed. Dawn was threatened with arrest for disturbing the peace. On the plus side, Dawn could display her beautiful t-shirt and got her flu jab!

(photo by Kim Chatman)

...I turned up at 12 in my Sarah Palin LIAR shirt & with 2 signs 1 of which had palingates.blogspot.com & 3 others with slogans. I planted them in the snow at the front door where I stood. After 45 min, bldg security told me to get rid of the signs cuz Palin’s publisher was paying $85/ hr for facility, (can’t remember exact amt )I said no. He said the cops would come. They were parked right there. I said FINE. They can just give me a ticket. Anyway, he took the signs before I could grab them since using a walker slows one down. He crumbled them up after refusing to return them to me. I did make him give me the sticks back.( one was my meter stick) . He asked for my ID. I refused. I told him I could stay out there & sing my slogans & he said I’d be taken for disturbing the peace. I didn’t sing cuz I really don’t & laughter was something I didn’t want to inspire. So, instead, SarahPalin LIAR shirt prominently displayed, I entered what I thought would be the lion’s den only to find an H1N1 flu clinic giving free flu shots. GEEZ. And lucky too cuz I had planned on getting one. The nurse filled out the form for me cuz I didn’t have my reading glasses on the picket line. I pulled my sleeve down for the shot hoping that with my SP LIAR shirt I wasn’t at the mercy of 1 of Sarah’s biggest fans. It didn’t hurt. The next 1/2 hr I spent displaying my shirt to a winding line of people passing by with their books to be signed. I talked with people getting flu shots, ate a few Palin Xmas cookies & let those in line see that yes, even in Wasilla, there was a real live person who considered Palin less than legitimate. Had I known there was a flu clinic going on, I would have been more aggressive about letting brown uniformed security man get my signs. Other than that, mission accomplished, at least on a personal level. (Comment by Dawn on Shannyn Moore's blog.)

UPDATE - Commenter William Henley, at C4P, disputes the photographic evidence shown here and issues a charming threat to detractors of Sarah Palin:

Sandra, you are lying out your a**. I was at the Wasilla book-signing. As a matter of fact I was there at 10 p.m. the night before and was in line at 05:30. I was one of two people who sat out there all night. The second person (Amy) got there at midnight. I was there through-out and not a single protester with signs showed up at anytime. No single person was there handing out oblabla/hitler pictures. You are nothing more than a lying bi**h and need to go to one of the sights that care for what you are lying about. Just as one of the security heads told me, if anyone started trouble they probably would not have survived. I and many others at the signing were carrying our sidearms. Mine happens to be a police special 357 mag. and I know how to use it and rather enjoy using it for the right reasons, i.e. protecting Sarah Palin and family.

(H/T to gunsmoke)


Sarah turned her hand at food serving at the same venue a few days later. She wore gloves, but somehow she never seems able to find a hairnet for these occasions. Maybe hairnets don't come in big enough sizes to contain her generous mane...

Yum..

Todd looks tired...

Sarah signing yet another copy of "Going Rogue"

Yes, all in all, it was a busy week for Sarah Palin. It provided a lot of material for the bloggers, as usual...

We can't wait for the New Year!

palingates censored at Sarah Palin's book signing in Wasilla

Celtic Diva has just published a post about Sarah Palin's book signing in Wasilla and what really went on inside the sports complex. Kim Chatman was there and reported on the lone protester who had her signs destroyed by Sarah's security people.

Palingates was censored...

+++

DAWN, YOU ARE OUR HERO!

Sole standard-bearer Dawn amongst the Paliban!

"Celtic Diva" Linda Kellen Biegel explains in her post:

"While we have now heard about the "banning" and are all wondering who else is on the list, no one has heard about the censorship part deux: according to the Anchorage Daily News:

'At the Wasilla signing, many people talked about "Sarah" like she's a member of the family. The only signs in sight had to do with conservative causes or Christmas.'
There's a reason for that: the lady pictured above had her three signs taken away from her (one of them said simply "palingates.blogspot.com"...the URL for a popular anti-Palin blog ), while whatever Conservative signs the media saw were allowed to remain. (I verified this when Kim (Chatman) handed her the phone and I got a chance to talk to her for a moment.)

So, to summarize...the reason the ADN only saw "Conservative or Christmas" signs is because the Palinistas took any signs with a different point of view...even if it only had the location of a website with a different view.

In protest, this brave lady stood by the door with her shirt in full view and took quite a bit of flack. Kim said it was all she could do to maintain control when she heard people actually ask:

"Why is that woman allowed to have that shirt on?"

Kim's reply:

"Have you ever heard of "freedom of speech?"

Anyone else thinks naming that group "Conservative Patriots" is a complete joke? Who is calling whom a Nazi?"

Thank you, Dawn, Kim and Linda!

+++

UPDATE:

The Quitter Queen has tweeted again, and her fantasy right-wing rhetoric certainly will appeal to the right wing-extremists who showed up to her book signing in Wasilla:

.

Huffington Post And Babygate: The Iron Curtain On Sarah Palin’s Faked Pregnancy Starts To Decay – But The Censors Are Still Busy

The Huffington Post and their approach towards “babygate”, the scandal surrounding Sarah Palin’s faked pregnancy with Trig, is a sad tale. Ever since Huffington Post blogger Lee Stranahan on September 1, 2008 rejected the faked-pregnancy theory and declared:

“Sane people need to come to reasonable conclusions”

and added in the comments

“She was pregnant, according to multiple interviews I've done with people in Alaska. They think the speculation is crazy”

...the Huffington Post has taken such a “hard line” on anything related to babygate that it would make a censor outside the “free world” proud. Therefore, it is not hard to believe what Lee Stranahan then wrote in the comments of another of his articles about babygate on October 22, 2008:

“Thanks but I'll tell you that the editors of HuffPost -- including Roy Sekoff and Arianna -- have been nothing but supportive of my writing here.”

As I myself and many of my fellow companions have experienced multiple times during the last 12 months, comments left on Huffington Post about babygate are usually vigorously censored. At times, it was virtually impossible to get any comment through which referred to Sarah’s faked pregnancy, even if it was “moderately worded”.

Then came October 21, 2009 – yesterday. I almost fell off my chair when I read what Glynnis MacNicol, senior editor at www.mediaite.com dared to write in her article (which has been tucked away in the media section of Huffington Post):

Top Ten Outrageous Sarah Palin Stories Oprah Will Have To Address:

"Who's Your Mommy: Palin and the Trig Birthers

2. Calling Andrew Sullivan and the Sarah Palin birthers! Ever since Palin stepped into the national spotlight in August 2008 there has been persistent speculation as to whether she is truly the mother of her youngest son Trig or whether the baby actually belongs her daughter Bristol and Palin's merely claimed to be his parent as some sort of cover-up. Levi hit on the sensitive subject again in his first-person VF piece. It remains to be seen if Palin mentions it in her memoir, but if she's considering another run for public office it's absolutely fair game for Oprah. Below, a typical birther vid.”

Can you believe it! Asking questions about Sarah Palin’s pregnancy is “fair game”! Hallelujah! Does that mean that we are now…allowed to talk on Huffington Post about what is supposedly one of the greatest taboos in US history?

Well…yes. I mean, no. Not so fast! Don’t give the people too much freedom! They might abuse it. A small dose of freedom of speech, that’s what we need. Emphasis on “small”. After all, Sarah Palin “sells”, we don’t want to damage the product too much, do we!

So, yesterday, the struggle began. The struggle to find the right words, so that the comment on Huffington Post doesn’t get rejected. What is it like to live in a dictatorship with limited freedom of speech? Well, you can find out for yourself and get first-hand experience – just try to leave a comment on Huffington Post about Sarah Palin’s faked pregnancy and you can get a glimpse of what the people in communist Eastern Europe had to go through.

REJECTED:

“Sarah Palin faked her pregnancy. She is one of the biggest frauds that there ever was in US political history.”

ALLOWED:

“Sarah's explanation regarding the wild ride is unbelievable. Oprah should question her about it and ask why she undertook such a risky journey.”

REJECTED:

“The parentage of Trig was the first lie told by the Palins on the national stage. And Palin continues to use that baby as a prop for her own political gain; promoting pro-life and special needs children agenda.”

ALLOWED:

“Absolutely ...biggest HOAX pulled in American political history. And main stream media refused to carry the story for some reason.”

REJECTED:

“Can anyone explain to me the reason why Sarah Palin travelled by plane from Texas to Alaska whilst she was in labor and her waters had broken? Why didn't she go to the nearest hospital which is what any normal woman would do in her situation? Is Sarah Palin such a poor decision maker that she is willing to risk her own unborn down syndrome child's life in order for him to be born in Alaska? The above facts are not some nutty story made up by conspiracy theorists. These are the facts that Palin related herself regarding Trig's birth. Also remember that she supposedly knew that he had a heart defect that would require immediate attention when he was born. I think that her story does not hold water (excuse the pun) and that it requires further investigation.”

I could go on. There are many, many more examples of rejected comments.

Any form of censorship makes me literally sick. It makes me feel even more ill when a “liberal” publication censors valid concerns of citizens which are based on a huge pile of “circumstancial” evidence. If a right-winger would censor me, I don’t mind too much, because that’s what I would expect from them. But the Huffington Post? It just breaks my heart that this important progressive publication is basically at the forefront of censoring comments about one of the greatest scandals in US political history.

There is a fascinating twist to the story. Paradoxically, Lee Stranahan once had his own problems with “censorship” in progressive publications. Lee was involved in a huge controversy about the handling of the John Edwards story in the media – he complained that the progressive media was ignoring the story. From the LA Times:

“Stranahan argued that even though the mainstream media had been silent after the National Enquirer broke the story, "the progessive blogosphere is ignoring this story at its own peril because it's going to be big." It was the most popular piece on HuffPo for two days. It also caused Stranahan to be banned from the liberal blog Daily Kos, whose users decided they did not like Stranahan's insistence on discussing unflattering news that originated in the National Enquirer. (…)“I was genuinely surprised that I got banned from Kos,” he said. “I just wrote an editorial. Now I find myself doing hard reporting." Although no other liberal blogs have joined Kos in shunning him, he feels he has a lot at stake in figuring out the details of the Edwards affair that are still cloudy. "Suddenly my reputation is tied in to the outcome of this story," he said.”

When I read this story, I had the impression that someone like Lee Stranahan, who also created some incredibly funny videos featuring Sarah Palin, should be our “natural ally”. But for reasons we will probably never find out, “the left” partially has lost its mind and is so scared of doing any false reporting about Sarah Palin’s pregnancy that they all apart from a few lone voices have collectively closed their eyes, Lee Stranahan included.

Interestingly, the website www.mediaite.com that Glynnis MacNicol is editing is certainly not a liberal website. It clearly appears to be a “conservative” website, although possibly with a “moderate angle”, as far as I could see. In the same way hasn’t, for example, the conservative publicist Peggy Noonan published one of the most devastating articles about Sarah Palin that was ever written?

There are many shades of liberal and conservative, and we cannot agree with each other all the time – but we should all seek the truth together. That’s all I ask for.

Sarah Palin, a flawed muse...

C4P must be the most paranoid people around... They're pissed off with Gryph because he told them to stop giving their hard earned money to Sarah Palin. They're pissed off with Dennis Zaki for filming Sarah's speech and selling it to CNN. (They really enjoyed her speech, thanks to Dennis, so what seems to be the problem?) They're pissed off with the Trig Troofers, but then, they always were...

Well, they had this Trig Troofer thread going, but they delete ALL comments by Trig Troofers, however innocent. So you have these one-sided conversations going on, it's most bizarre! It happens in just about all their threads, Trig or no Trig.

Some Alaskan woman came out with this comment:

"And here is that new troll patrick who is actually the person who posts palingates.

If I ever see this person, I will make sure to "bellow" loud enough for everyone to hear before I begin the task of making a mockery of him IN public."

I posted a comment: "I'm Patrick?" They deleted it. So I posted another one: "Why did you delete my comment? I was just asking: "I'm Patrick?" They deleted that one too.

Never mind. I'm feeling much better since I had the sex change operation, but I don't know how I'm going to break the news to my sons... my husband has come to terms with having to become gay to stay married to me. It's very exciting for all of us! Good job we're liberals, it saved us a lot of trouble.

Seriously now, one of their people said:

"Liberals are nuts. Why not focus (as we conservatives do) on the horrible consequences of liberal politics? Instead, liberals bang away with these weird notions in an attempt to discredit the person, rather than the person's policies. And when we conservatives do point out some personal character flaw of a liberal (e.g., consorting for 20 years with Bill Ayers) we are attacked."

It's a very strange comment. Why would liberals focus on the horrible consequences of liberal politics? (duh!)

As for discrediting the person rather than their policies, maybe this person should pay us a visit and see how many posts focus on Sarah Palin's policies. Ethics, politics, environment, wildlife, Alaska Natives, hypocrisy, cronyism, you name it, I've covered it. Babygate is a small part of what I focus on, the other stuff take quite a lot of my time.

As you well know, I only deleted a comment ONCE. Some nutter wrote something longer than "War and Peace", going on and on and on about some very strange theory. It was too bizarre, so I deleted it. All other comments, from trolls, from abusive people are all there, in full glory.

You see, I'm not insecure about what I do. Anybody is welcome to discuss the topics I write about, people can disagree with me, with each other, it's fine.

The woman called RAM takes great pleasure in saying: "Get off my blog!" She says it all the time.

The fact that C4P can't stand any kind of criticism says a lot more about them and their muse than it does about the people they ban from commenting.
.

Sarah Palin's knight in shining armour

Eddie Burke; Sarah Palin with Piper

The "charming" radio show host Eddie Burke, darling of Sarah Palin's C4P fanclub and defender of all things Palin, is not such respectable character.

A report from 1994, not available from ADN's online archives, tells us this:

Anchorage Daily News
July 22, 1994
Section: Metro
Edition: Final
Page: E3

BURKE TO PAY $1,500 FINE IN INCIDENT WITH WAITRESS BUSINESSMAN PLEADS NO CONTEST TO ASSAULT, COMPOUNDING CRIME
LIZ RUSKIN
Daily News reporter
Staff

A tearful, apologetic Eddie Burke pleaded no contest Thursday to misdemeanor charges for grabbing at a waitress’s crotch, then offering to pay her $400 to keep her from reporting him to the police. Burke, owner of a downtown gas station and former Anchorage Assembly candidate, was fined $1,500 for assault and compounding a crime. Prosecutor Susan Wibker said Burke was out carousing that April night, going from strip joint to strip joint in a white limousine with friends. After midnight, Burke stopped by the Peanut Farm, a restaurant and bar on Old Seward Highway.

"He was intoxicated and he was sexed up," Wibker said.

Burke approached a waitress from behind, pinned her against a cash register and stuffed his hands in the front pockets of her apron, groping her between the legs and laughing, Wibker said. Later, he assaulted a bartender, putting him in what Wibker described as a headlock.

Years later, in August 2008, Burke pulled another stunt:

Rep. Charisse Millett received a vile, graphic, sexually charged text from Eddie Burke in the middle of the night. When I say this text was graphic, the word graphic does not describe it well enough. It was a disgusting comment.

A month later, Eddie Burke was back:

Anchorage AM radio host Eddie Burke has been suspended after broadcasting the phone numbers of women involved in organizing a protest rally against Sarah Palin over the weekend, his station manager said today.

Last week Burke, host of a conservative daily talk show, called rally organizers Charla Sterne and Ilona Bessenyey "socialist, baby-killing maggots," read their phone numbers on the air and encouraged listeners to call them. The women said their voice-mail quickly filled with angry, profane messages, some of them threatening.

This week Burke harrassed Republican activist Andree McLeod during a public event in Anchorage, then used the recording in his radio show.

Andree has asked for disclosure of some official state e-mails that were copied to Todd Palin. She filed her request over seven months ago and Sarah Palin's administration have been dragging their feet since then, asking for extensions every time a deadline for releasing the information approaches.

Sarah Palin's knights in shining armour are mounting a campaign to discredit anybody who dares challenge any dodgy actions by the governor.

Let's use Sarah Palin's own logic: is she palling around with a sex offender?

This is the same Eddie Burke who interviewed cute Piper Palin on his program...




Eddie Burke picture: Mudflats
.

Freedom of expression

Freedom of expression and the right to anonymity and privacy apply to all, from the far right to the far left. These issues have been debated recently when AKM Mudflats was outed by Mike Doogan. A blogger from C4P, Video Ominous, was supportive of AKM and made his position known across the blogosphere.

Now C4P found themselves at the receiving end due to a dispute between them and Rep Jay Ramras. AKM has shown support to the C4P bloggers and all is well on the right and on the left.

The C4P bloggers may be hot on issues of anonymity and privacy, but they're not so hot on freedom of expression. Their overt manipulation of the comments on the ADN political blogs is a clear indication of that.

They accused me of being a Trig truther and of posting Sarah Palin's home address urging people to send her hate mail.

OK, I could be called a Trig truther. I happen to doubt that Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig, but that's incidental to the plot. I couldn't care less who the real mother is and this blog is not dedicated to finding out the truth about Sarah Palin's wild pregnancy stories.

But in the context of the Governor's political record and aspirations, this story plays a part. Sarah Palin could have quietly adopted Trig for whatever reason and proceeded to provide better health care than the real mother could. That would have been laudable.

What's not so noble is telling stories like the wild ride and embelishing little details about her pregnancy, then going on to use an infant with Down's Syndrome to further her personal and political agenda. The poor child was up at all hours during the vice presidential campaign, being passed from person to person like a toy.

Piper's cuteness was exploited as well. Who could fail to find the scene of Piper smoothing Trig's hair with her own spit endearing? That seven year old child spent two months out of school, staying up late, giving autographs and simply being cute for the benefit of her mother's political ambitions.

I don't believe Sarah Palin was pregnant with Trig because I find her own account of the labour an insult to my intelligence. I don't believe Sarah Palin was pregnant with Trig because my eyes and my own experiences of pregnancies and childbirth make me very skeptical regarding her tight abs.

So I occasionally post photographs of women of the same build, four months pregnant, next to Sarah Palin seven months pregnant.

I wouldn't have touched the subject if Sarah Palin had not used Trig as a political tool. As long as she continues to use her family as political props, I'll continue to post items challenging her position and behaviour.

Now to the hate mail. Yes, I posted Sarah Palin's home address. It's very easy to find it online, just google it. Her address appeared twice in this blog.

On one occasion it was posted in the context of adopting a wolf in her name so the adoption certificate and a plush toy could be sent directly to her home with a thank you letter.

The other time was in connection with the IRS and whistleblowing on somebody believed to be filing false tax returns. The address was given simply to help with filling in the forms. There was a tongue in cheek reference to sending a thank you note to Sarah Palin should somebody collect a reward.

As far as I know, I'm not going ga-ga, so I would like to invite somebody from C4P to point to the post where I urged readers to send hate mail to their beloved Sarah Palin.

In a nutshell: this is a political blog. Any references to Sarah Palin's pregnancy are made in the context of her political narrative. I choose to make these posts a bit irreverent, that's my prerogative.

I have never incited any hate towards Sarah Palin, by mail or otherwise.

If the ADN chooses not to link to my blog that's their choice, but since the C4P campaign to control the contents of the ADN's political blogs and the editor's aquiescence to their demands I no longer consider the ADN to be a credible or independent forum or news source, so I'd rather not be linked by them.

I don't believe in censorship.
.

Sarah Palin's supporters and censorship

Conservatives4Palin have a call to action to "clean up" the comments section of the ADN. The idea is to target advertisers and encourage them to stop placing ads next to the "filth" the ADN allow on their pages.

Here's one paragraph of a very long article:

"Your promises to clean up the poison at adn.com have turned out to be completely insincere. Enough is enough. No more invective about white trash, hillbillies, methamphetamine or crack cocaine use, or trailer parks. No more snarky comments about the purported sex lives of the Governor or her children, such as statements that the Governor was listening to her daughter "breeding" in her own home. No more insults towards special needs children, or speculation about the parenting skills of the Governor and her husband. No more assertions that the Governor is not the mother of her youngest child. These claims all appear on your website on a regular basis and are deeply offensive to all decent people."

I agree, some of the comments are of a personal nature.

Let's cast our minds back to the vice presidential campaign. Who campaigned on a platform of family values? Who suggested that small town values reflected true America?

Sarah Palin ran a deeply personal campaign, her family was paraded in the rallies for all to see. Willow and Piper signed countless autographs. Sarah Palin considers her children officials of the state and claims expenses for their travel, her reasoning being that they are on official state business.

Sarah Palin told the whole world that Wasilla was an example to the rest of America, that the people from her small town were true Americans because they had proper values.

When both of them failed to live up to her claims, when her family and small town values proved to be less than desirable, people started questioning Sarah Palin just as forcefully as she had trumpeted the whole idea of perfect family and perfect small town which implied their example should be followed by other American families and other American towns.

Sarah Palin exposed her own daughter as a pregnant unwed teenager to counter rumours regarding her pregnancy with Trig. A birth certificate and relevant medical records would have sufficed to prove that she, Sarah Palin, had given birth to Trig and her daughter's privacy would have been preserved. Sarah Palin's own actions perpetuated the rumours and spawned all the birth conspiracies, making her daughter and the babies in question legitimate targets of public curiosity.

Sarah Palin included Levi in her family entourage. He became part of the family, sharing the same values. Until very recently he was part of the illusion of strong family values, as seen in the Greta Van Susteren interview. Sarah Palin has a hotline to People magazine to confirm or deny reports about her family. She issues press releases on her official Governor's website regarding her family, Levi included. Now she's disappointed because Levi is flying solo, stating the facts as he sees them. He was a private citizen until the vice presidential campaign. Sarah Palin made him a public figure, nobody else.

Sarah Palin waxed lyrical about the importance of her marvellous extended family, about how they all pitch in together and help each other. So when Diana Palin, who belongs to the marvellous extended family, behaves in a way that reflects badly on the family and small town "better" values, the public has the right to question the Governor's previous assertions. Sarah Palin made her whole extended family public figures, not by naming them individually, but by painting them as a model, an example to be followed by all other American families.

Sarah Palin's family cannot be out-of-bounds for the simple reason that she herself put them in the public arena in no uncertain terms.

The fact that neither the family nor the small town lived up to her claims is something she will have to live with, as will her supporters.

Sarah Palin used both of them to promote her own agenda, now her supporters can't cry foul and claim that members of the public are not entitled to comment on what they see as blatant hypocrisy.

Censorship will not make the facts more palatable or absolve Sarah Palin of the responsibility of placing her own family and town under public scrutiny in the first place.
.