How far will the Left go?

[woodchip]

Now that Palin is the chosen republican vp, how far is the left smear machine willing to go. Here is a example that should make anyone who thinks themselves a liberal to take pause and consider changing your thought process:

\"Members of the lefty blogosphere haven't stopped perpetuating the rumor Sarah Palin \"faked\" her last pregnancy and are now humiliating her daughter Bristol on the blatantly incorrect suspicion she is the real mother of baby Trig.\"

http://townhall.com/blog/g/9b3375c7-6a2 ... 67282a1ce1

I just wonder how these people get up in the morning and appreciate what they see in the bathroom mirror.
Just as Rush Limbaugh predicted the left will go all out to discredit Palin. They even criticize Palin for having her latest child with downs syndrome. It is too bad their (bloggers) mothers didn't abort them to spare us such idiocy.

[Bet51987]

Woodchip, I'm surprised you're tying all Liberals into this trash but to answer your question they would go as far as the conservatives who try to tie Obama to Osama Bin Laden would go. I may not like her for a ton of reasons but never that.

Proud to be a Liberal.

Bee

[woodchip]

While tying Obama to being a muslin has some very small credence as he did go to a Muslim school early on, I don't see much of the right trying to picture his kids as being part of the slur. Candidates are considered fair game, the children should be left alone.

[Lothar]

Palin's latest son is her own.

Her 17 year old daughter is also pregnant, planning to have her baby and marry the father.

The rumors basically combined two true issues into a single bogus one.

[Kyouryuu]

I must occupy the wrong \"blogosphere.\" Never even heard of the story. Don't really care, either.

God, I hate that term \"blogosphere.\" It's the media's biggest excuse to lend an aura of credibility to \"someone, somewhere said\" hearsay. Want to talk about a controversial subject? Point to a vague \"blogosphere\" and say they opened the door. Biggest. Joke. Ever.

At least the biggest since applying a question mark onto the end of a statement, of course.

\"Obama a Muslim?\"

\"McCain an Angry War Veteran?\"

\"Hurricane Katrina Targeted Gays?\"

[Lothar]

I must occupy the wrong "blogosphere." Never even heard of the story.

I hadn't either, but apparently a Kos diarist posted it recently, among others. I'm personally glad the campaign nipped this in the bud...

The accusations of hypocrisy are starting to come out, too. I'm not a huge fan of James Dobson, but I like his response:

In the 32-year history of Focus on the Family, we have offered prayer, counseling and resource assistance to tens of thousands of parents and children in the same situation the Palins are now facing. We have always encouraged the parents to love and support their children and always advised the girls to see their pregnancies through, even though there will of course be challenges along the way. That is what the Palins are doing, and they should be commended once again for not just talking about their pro-life and pro-family values, but living them out even in the midst of trying circumstances.

"Being a Christian does not mean you're perfect. Nor does it mean your children are perfect. But it does mean there is forgiveness and restoration when we confess our imperfections to the Lord. I've been the beneficiary of that forgiveness and restoration in my own life countless times, as I'm sure the Palins have.

"The media are already trying to spin this as evidence Gov. Palin is a 'hypocrite,' but all it really means is that she and her family are human. They are in my prayers and those of millions of Americans.

[Dakatsu]

God, I hate that term "blogosphere."

YES! +1 ZING!

Woodchip, I'm surprised you're tying all Liberals into this trash but to answer your question they would go as far as the conservatives who try to tie Obama to Osama Bin Laden would go. I may not like her for a ton of reasons but never that.

Proud to be a Liberal.

Bee

...
YES! +1 ZING!

I could have my liberal website guide book held the wrong way, but isn't the DailyKos where anyone can just write crap? I could be wrong, but I think that is how a blog works... so it is just one nutjob. If it was a mass utterance of this claim, then you would have a point, but since it's one person, whoop-te-do!

[Will Robinson]

...I could have my liberal website guide book held the wrong way, but isn't the DailyKos where anyone can just write crap?...

Not exactly, you can only write crap about conservatives, I think anything else is not allowed.

[woodchip]

Woodchip, I'm surprised you're tying all Liberals into this trash but to answer your question they would go as far as the conservatives who try to tie Obama to Osama Bin Laden would go. I may not like her for a ton of reasons but never that.

Proud to be a Liberal.

Bee

If you read closely instead of skimming you will note I accused the "Left spin machine", not all liberals. I suggested if you are a liberal that you then take pause at what is being projected as it may affect how readers may perceive what you are by what you are affiliated with.

On the one hand you remonstrated against what the Taliban do to women yet you don't come out and protest the mental abuse liberal bloggers will throw at a young girl. It will take me, a male, to berate you for your ignoring the real problem (by tacitly approving with "The conservatives do it to" mantra)before you will come out and agree that the far left is despicable for what they have said. Show me in kind where a far right blogger has said something in kind about Obama's children.

[Bet51987]

Woodchip, I'm surprised you're tying all Liberals into this trash but to answer your question they would go as far as the conservatives who try to tie Obama to Osama Bin Laden would go. I may not like her for a ton of reasons but never that.

Proud to be a Liberal.

Bee

If you read closely instead of skimming you will note I accused the "Left spin machine", not all liberals. I suggested if you are a liberal that you then take pause at what is being projected as it may affect how readers may perceive what you are by what you are affiliated with.

Woody it sounds like you're pointing the finger at all liberals when you say what I underlined above. At least that's the way I look at it but I may be wrong on how I interpreted it. If so, then I take back what I said. And, why should the actions of some low-life blogger that only other low-life bloggers would listen to have any effect on who I am? It would be different, and I would be offended, if someone of importance said it to a wide audience.

On the one hand you remonstrated against what the Taliban do to women yet you don't come out and protest the mental abuse liberal bloggers will throw at a young girl. It will take me, a male, to berate you for your ignoring the real problem (by tacitly approving with "The conservatives do it to" mantra)before you will come out and agree that the far left is despicable for what they have said. Show me in kind where a far right blogger has said something in kind about Obama's children.

I haven't approved anything especially that and I don't post blogs or even read what bloggers post. I just don't. I get my information from CNN, MSNBC, and Ontheissues.org. I never heard what this blogger said about her kids until you brought it up and when I go to my other forums I frequent and not one of those say or do anything despicable.

As far as you berating me.... you don't have to because I think you know me better than that. And as far as skimming... Yes I do which sometimes gets me into trouble.

Bee

[Sirius]

The reason no right-wingers have talked about Obama's children is that they have nothing interesting to say about them. They've picked on his wife with dubious evidence, they've picked on him with dubious evidence, they've tied him to his former loose-cannon pastor with, again, dubious evidence. (Speaking of which, I have seen an article of questionable veracity that links Sarah Palin to a cult-like branch of Christianity. So if those rumours spread she could be seeing the same thing pretty soon...!)

The Republicans play on fear because they have nothing else left to use...

[Will Robinson]

....they've picked on him with dubious evidence, they've tied him to his former loose-cannon pastor with, again, dubious evidence....

According to Obama he's attended that church for 20 years, he calls the reverend his mentor and he's on the record as having a discussion with the reverend where he tells him that at some point he'll have to distance himself from the reverend when the nature of the sermons are revealed!!

So you can call that "dubious" if you want but I call it dishonest to have Obama claim 'That isn't the Rev. Wright I knew... so now I remove my self from his influence...'!!
Seems to me you're trying to rewrite history there.

If Palin has a similar relationship with some hate mongoring religious sect you can bet the left will be bringing it to the public forum and you won't be calling it dubious...after all you brought it up with no sources just now didn't you?!?

[MD-1118]

Never even heard of the story. Don't really care, either.

Gotta go with you on this one. However...

God, I hate that term "blogosphere." It's the media's biggest excuse to lend an aura of credibility to "someone, somewhere said" hearsay. Want to talk about a controversial subject? Point to a vague "blogosphere" and say they opened the door. Biggest. Joke. Ever.

I followed you up to the "opened the door" reference. I guess I was busy staring at the insides of my eyelids when this transpired, because I am completely lost. Care to explain?

[Kyouryuu]

What I mean is that sometimes the media just won't \"go there\" on its own when it comes to a controversial issue. They won't talk about it. They don't want to be accused of bias or whatnot. They don't want to own the controversy or the fallout.

By invoking the \"blogosphere\" argument, the media can behave as if it is a third-party observer. \"Some other people said this.\" In echoing the hearsay, the media disassociates itself with the source of the news and gets to run the controversial subject. If it ever finds itself in trouble, or if the information proves inaccurate, they can also turn around and pin it on the blogosphere.

Yet another feature of the blogosphere argument is for talking points. If they want to bring up a particular view of a subject, they can turn to the blogosphere and echo some sentiment from there. Since there are millions upon millions of blogs out there, you can find a quotation for virtually anything. It's a vacuous citation, kind of like \"experts,\" \"scientists,\" \"a study,\" \"insiders,\" \"researchers,\" \"pollsters,\" etc.

[Lothar]

isn't the DailyKos where anyone can just write crap?
..... it's one person, whoop-te-do!

Anyone can write on DailyKos... but it takes a lot of others to vote your post onto the top of the "recommended" list and give it a couple thousand comments, mostly in agreement. That was the case with the post I linked.

-----

I partly agree with Bettina on the Obama / Muslim "connections". Parts of the right-wing blogosphere made a number of attempts to paint Obama as Muslim, even as the scandal with his church was in full swing. They took little bits of evidence (mostly, a declaration from Obama's father that he was Muslim on a school enrollment form, from when he was probably too young to make such a decision for himself) and ran way, way too far with them. Similarly, some blogs are trying to say Obama's US birth certificate may have been forged, again based on pretty weak evidence. So many bloggers want to be the "next big thing", to break the next Rathergate-level scandal... but too many of them fail to factcheck themselves.

... and, as Kyouryuu points out, too many media outlets are willing to jump on these non-stories. Or, rather, they demonstrate poor judgment in their choice of which to pursue and which to drop. They shied away from the John Edwards affair story entirely, but often quote "bloggers" or "sources" on stories that turn out to be crap.

[MD-1118]

Ah, I see... in other words, they depersonalize the argument by involving the masses in order to beat the heat they would have inevitably taken. Slick, real slick. Also pretty damned cowardly. Well, that's the media for you these days.

I agree that blogs in and of themselves are not what most generally consider a \"source\", but I will say that they usually contain topics of interest and/or controversy. After all, isn't that kind of what we're doing here?

I don't mean to derail, so please ignore the above.

If I had to, I would say that McCain is indeed stooping low by choosing a female VP (and come on, everyone knows he's just trying to pick up the feminist's/whoever was going to vote for Hilary's votes anyway), but at the same time he chose an interesting person. Why? Because she's not totally clueless. Now, I'm on the Republican ticket when it comes to voting, but half the time I don't vote Republican. I vote who I think should be in office, given the options. Does the fact that McCain picked Palin as VP mean I'll vote for him? Maybe, or maybe not. I haven't decided yet. It does seem like a somewhat better choice than Obama... but I really don't like picking the lesser of the evils. Maybe I just won't vote - that way I can say \"Told you so\" and \"We need someone else\" regardless of who wins. =/

[Sirius]

So you can call that "dubious" if you want but I call it dishonest to have Obama claim 'That isn't the Rev. Wright I knew... so now I remove my self from his influence...'!!
Seems to me you're trying to rewrite history there.

Conveniently ignoring the fact that Obama already said he looked to Wright for spiritual rather than political guidance. The incendiary remarks Wright made were, obviously, political in nature. Obama has never said anything to indicate he has a grudge against white America either. (Michelle Obama could have if you took her comments out of context and then misinterpreted them, which, of course, has been done too.)

While I can't prove he doesn't have those sorts of sympathies, what he says is fairly good evidence, especially since lying through his teeth doesn't seem particularly characteristic. And, in turn, you can't prove he does have those sympathies. Does everyone agree with everything their pastor says? I doubt it; in fact I'd wager few do.

If Palin has a similar relationship with some hate mongoring religious sect you can bet the left will be bringing it to the public forum and you won't be calling it dubious...after all you brought it up with no sources just now didn't you?!?

Nice try. No, I didn't. I referenced them, but I did obviously not state I believed them; I was using the rumours for purposes of comparison only to emphasise how ridiculous some of the claims of the conservatives against Obama are.

Will the left be bringing these claims to the fore in any big way? I don't know. They shouldn't; as I said, what I saw looked dubious, which is why I didn't cite it (if you want to see it I can dig up the link, of course). If it is highly publicised... well, that doesn't suddenly make me more likely to agree with them; rumours don't become any truer just because they've spread. The only thing that would make me consider them "not dubious" is more evidence. Which would make them be less dubious.

[Nightshade]

An Obama supporter speaks out:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... DA&q=Diddy

[woodchip]

I could have my liberal website guide book held the wrong way, but isn't the DailyKos where anyone can just write crap? I could be wrong, but I think that is how a blog works... so it is just one nutjob. If it was a mass utterance of this claim, then you would have a point, but since it's one person, whoop-te-do!

Before you think of the DailyKos as some insignificant website, perhaps you should look at who has posted and contributed there:

Current officeholders

* Barbara Boxer
* John Conyers
* Jon Corzine
* Richard Durbin
* Russ Feingold
* Jennifer Granholm (happens to be my states gov.)
* Tom Harkin
* Jane Harman
* Steve Kagen
* Ted Kennedy
* John Kerry
* Jim McDermott
* Barack Obama
* Nancy Pelosi
* Harry Reid
* Bill Richardson
* Chuck Schumer
* Henry Waxman

Former officeholders

* Birch Bayh
* Chris Bell
* Jimmy Carter
* John Edwards
* Bob Kerrey
* Eliot Spitzer
* Tom Vilsack
* Mark Warner

As you can see the Daily Kos is very significant to the liberal politicians. What gets said there is read by the Democratic elites and to me The Daily Kos is really a mainstream liberal "blog" used as a sounding board for all kinds of liberal mind think.
Too bad Palin's kids have to be targeted by such broad spectrum muckrakers.
I also deplore the various news networks (Fox news included) who are continually asking interviewee's what they think about Palin's daughters being pregnant out of wedlock. Leave the girl alone and focus on what the candidates are going to do for the country. If I want sleaze journalism I'll buy the National Enquirer.

[Will Robinson]

So you can call that "dubious" if you want but I call it dishonest to have Obama claim 'That isn't the Rev. Wright I knew... so now I remove my self from his influence...'!!
Seems to me you're trying to rewrite history there.

Conveniently ignoring the fact that Obama already said he looked to Wright for spiritual rather than political guidance. The incendiary remarks Wright made were, obviously, political in nature. Obama has never said anything to indicate he has a grudge against white America either....

So then why do the liberals give John McCain grief when he looked to the crazy white preacher for campaign donations after all it wasn't political guidance he got from him?!?
Come on man, be real! If the shoe was on the other foot you wouldn't be making these kind of excuses!
read Obama's first book and you see he holds the same view of "whitey" as the Reverend Wright.

[snoopy]

I'm not sure if this is in defense of Obama, or against him, but I'll throw in this comment:

At heart, Obama grew up a third culture kid, and will tend to be a chameleon. I grew up as one, and see myself doing it... I just naturally tend to morph (more so that the average person) to fit the environment that I'm in.

That's good in that Obama probably isn't as bad as any given publication that you can dredge up might make him seem.

That's bad in that he will probably end up being less predictable in office than your typical \"straight shooter.\"

I certainly don't think he's a closet extreme Muslim, or a closet extreme racist, or anything like that. I just get the sense that I don't really know what he's going to do (other than raise my taxes) in office, more so than McCain. I'd say they're like 40% vs. 60% confidence.

[Duper]

I could have my liberal website guide book held the wrong way, but isn't the DailyKos where anyone can just write crap? I could be wrong, but I think that is how a blog works... so it is just one nutjob. If it was a mass utterance of this claim, then you would have a point, but since it's one person, whoop-te-do!

Before you think of the DailyKos as some insignificant website, perhaps you should look at who has posted and contributed there:

Current officeholders

* Barbara Boxer
* John Conyers
* Jon Corzine
* Richard Durbin
* Russ Feingold
* Jennifer Granholm (happens to be my states gov.)
* Tom Harkin
* Jane Harman
* Steve Kagen
* Ted Kennedy
* John Kerry
* Jim McDermott
* Barack Obama
* Nancy Pelosi
* Harry Reid
* Bill Richardson
* Chuck Schumer
* Henry Waxman

Former officeholders

* Birch Bayh
* Chris Bell
* Jimmy Carter
* John Edwards
* Bob Kerrey
* Eliot Spitzer
* Tom Vilsack
* Mark Warner

As you can see the Daily Kos is very significant to the liberal politicians. What gets said there is read by the Democratic elites and to me The Daily Kos is really a mainstream liberal "blog" used as a sounding board for all kinds of liberal mind think.
Too bad Palin's kids have to be targeted by such broad spectrum muckrakers.
I also deplore the various news networks (Fox news included) who are continually asking interviewee's what they think about Palin's daughters being pregnant out of wedlock. Leave the girl alone and focus on what the candidates are going to do for the country. If I want sleaze journalism I'll buy the National Enquirer.

Never the less Woody, that doesn't justify "the media" (they know who they are) using the 'blogosphere' or whatever as a nebulous scapegoat to spin their crap. If they want info from these "reputable contributors" they can go TALK TO THEM. That is what reporters do.

[Gooberman]

So then why do the liberals give John McCain grief when he looked to the crazy white preacher for campaign donations after all it wasn't political guidance he got from him?!?

To survive? Rev. Wright was on a continuous loop in the media when the left found their own preacher. Rev. Wright --a former marine mind you -- was the gift that kept on giving, 'look at the scary black man, whoooo.... hes coming to eat your children...'

[Kyouryuu]

Never the less Woody, that doesn't justify "the media" (they know who they are) using the 'blogosphere' or whatever as a nebulous scapegoat to spin their crap. If they want info from these "reputable contributors" they can go TALK TO THEM. That is what reporters do.

Yes, and to tie this back to Palin. When Palin was first announced, the media ran hours of coverage over "Palin who?" "Who is Palin?" etc.

You're the media. You're supposed to find the answers, then report the answers. Instead, you haul on a bunch of talking heads to say "We don't know who she is!"