Andrew Sullivan has been, somewhat singlehandedly, pursuing the Trig Palin birth story. He simply does not believe Sarah Palin’s undocumented tale. Sullivan posts a lot on his blog (even by my standards) and I’ve learned to skim and skip, and I skim and skip the Trig business because I just don’t care.
But this week Sullivan is on vacation and one of his guest bloggers, Dave Weigel, put up a post about Believing Sarah Palin. Weigel took Sullivan to task for continuing to pursue this matter — “People want him to take a deep breath and stop obsessing over this conspiracy theory. Count me among those people.”
Well don’t count litbrit among those people. She has Some serious questions for Dave Weigel re: his decidedly unserious and woefully uninformed Sarah Palin assertions.
So, to rephrase my intial question, as pertains to the first of these big lies about Trig: If a male candidate for high office described an act of bravery in war that never happened, complete with details about leaking body fluids, and he were elected president, and then it was proven that said story was just that–pure fabrication–is it your contention, Dave, that it wouldn’t matter at all?
Litbrit makes an interesting case, whatever you believe, and whether you think this matters or not. She surely takes Weigel apart.
Let’s see, no comments so far. I guess it doesn’t matter.
I’ve always kind of considered this controversy silly, the left-wing equivalent of the morons who think Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii.
But this piece is pretty persuasive. Hmmm.
What is the theory? That she adopted the baby for political reasons? Or that he is really a grandkid?
Why would anyone assume the child was not her own? DO you really believe she would lower herself to that level ?
This is on the whole ludicrous at best , ignorant at worst. The lady opened all of her medical records (something no other candidate has ever done) just to avoid unintelligent falsehoods, like these.
For the record, Ms. Palin was the only candidate in 2008 who did NOT release her medical records.
Mr. Franks responded with a 289 word comment that is largely dependent on a long excerpt from babble.com. (Good source, that.) He also notes that: “The New York Times Also acknowledges the fact that Palin did in fact release her medical records.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/04/us/politics/04medical.html
The Times does nothing of the sort Mr. Franks. By definition, a two-page ex post facto letter from one medical doctor, as the Times reported, does not constitute a release of medical records. That point is not contested, however it is spun.
Further, whether Trig is Ms. Palin’s child, is immaterial. The simple fact is that she has made his birth part of her public personna in that she bravely returned to Alaska to give birth to the child after her water broke in Texas.
What the critics are questioning is whether this birth narrative is true, and if it is true the fact that it shows a blatant and reckless disregard for the health of the child, if not herself.
I don’t understand why you are being so critical of Mr Franks. He seems to be stating the truth. And if opinion is given, then there are those who may not agree with you. I notice that you did not post my prior comment. Mrs Palin is a respected member of her community.
Because I’m a cranky old man who doesn’t suffer fools well and Mr. Franks is decidedly a fool.
And after seven years and almost 18,000 blog posts I can do whatever I want.
Since Alaskan state troopers described the Wasilla area as “The Meth Capital of Alaska,” I’d say being a respected member of Palin’s community is nothing to tout.
You’re not cranky. You’re just tired of your site being hijacked by the functionally illiterate – i.e. people who can’t be bothered to read anything with enough comprehension to understand the difference between “the truth” (or, my new favorite, “Facts”) and b.s.
There’s back-and-forth conversation, and then there’s…whatever this crap is.