tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post4662784099834993024..comments2024-02-10T02:14:39.898-05:00Comments on Buckeye Surgeon: The Palin PregnancyJeffrey Parks MD FACShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15650563299849196122noreply@blogger.comBlogger89125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-61809229102348725632010-12-26T18:58:30.608-05:002010-12-26T18:58:30.608-05:00is the pressure on one of her kids to give palin a...is the pressure on one of her kids to give palin an infant so she can cart it around to all those election speeches? the crowds loved the baby angle and she worked it to the max. so i am willing to bet that the planing is already in play and i am certain she needs to be seen with an infant at all political events.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-65430593717286173592010-09-28T07:25:34.819-04:002010-09-28T07:25:34.819-04:00Was a beautiful page. Thanks to the designers and ...Was a beautiful page. Thanks to the designers and managers.mikroenjeksiyonhttp://www.tupbebekgebelik.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-35852445059076225702010-08-25T08:38:20.527-04:002010-08-25T08:38:20.527-04:00Audrey at Palin's Deceptions:
"I do not b...Audrey at Palin's Deceptions:<br />"I do not believe that Sarah Palin, under any circumstances, would have risked giving birth on an airplane. ... More to the point, I do not believe she DID take this risk. She was absolutely positive she would not have a baby on the airplane. And how could she be positive? The same way I am positive every time I fly that I will not have a baby on an airplane. I am not pregnant.<br /><br /><b>We are "working" this story knowing how it ends.</b> We know that Sarah Palin did NOT have a child on an airplane on April 17th 2008. But at 2 PM that afternoon, when Sarah Palin would have been walking down that jetway, <b>she could NOT have known what the next ten hours would hold.</b> If Sarah Palin was 35 weeks pregnant on April 17th, given her obstetric history, not only was it possible she would give birth within ten hours of her membranes rupturing, <b>it was probable. </b><br /><br />... I can accept - and always have - that someone in Palin's position might try to give the speech. MIGHT, though the image of an amniotic fluid "leak" turning into a full-fledged rupture while on stage certainly would have dissuaded me personally. (If you wonder what I'm talking about, dump approximately one and a half quarts of yellowish pinkish kinda funky smelling liquid between YOUR legs all at once. Now picture this happening WHILE giving a speech to other governors. Hmmm. Sort of wrecks the professional aura, doesn't it?)<br /><br />But no one will ever convince me - ever! - that the image-conscious governor of Alaska risked having to lie down in public, spread her legs, and grunting and panting in a messy puddle of amniotic fluid, mucous, blood, urine and possibly either the baby's excrement, her own, or both, push her baby out on the carpet in the aisle. Risked her own health and her baby's. … And taken this chance not once, but twice, on two separate four hour flights.<br /><br />… And consider this: If you are going to put this forward - that Sarah Palin recklessly endangered the life of her child - you're going to have to be able to offer some plausible explanation for why she did it. That has never happened. Sarah Palin has NEVER offered any credible or even remotely believable explanation as to <b>WHY. WHAT was her utterly compelling reason for getting on the airplane? </b>WHY did she chance this medically risky and humiliating scenario?<br /><br />So that her child could be born in Alaska.<br /><br />This is the only reason she has ever offered. So that her child could be born in Alaska. (Or to quote the succinct Todd, "You can't have a fish picker [commercial fisherman] from Texas.") This makes no sense. It is in fact one of the dumbest things I have ever heard.<br /><br />..If the events of April 17, 2008 occurred as described, at 2 PM on that day when she got an airplane to return to Alaska, she could not know what would happen during the next eight hours. This is the risk the Sarah Palin would not take. <b>This is the risk she did not take.</b>"<br /><br />http://www.palindeception.com/blog/2009/06/pulling-palin-my-response-to.html<br /><br />And. Mr. Andrew Ryan, the point is not merely whether Trig survived (of course he did, because he was never on any airplane the day before being born). <br /><br />The point is that Sarah Palin is an evil liar who cannot be trusted. That is the cold reality of the situation.Lidianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-82610598795828112822010-08-25T08:37:32.007-04:002010-08-25T08:37:32.007-04:00Audrey at Palin's Deceptions:
"I do not b...Audrey at Palin's Deceptions:<br />"I do not believe that Sarah Palin, under any circumstances, would have risked giving birth on an airplane. ... More to the point, I do not believe she DID take this risk. She was absolutely positive she would not have a baby on the airplane. And how could she be positive? The same way I am positive every time I fly that I will not have a baby on an airplane. I am not pregnant.<br /><br /><b>We are "working" this story knowing how it ends.</b> We know that Sarah Palin did NOT have a child on an airplane on April 17th 2008. But at 2 PM that afternoon, when Sarah Palin would have been walking down that jetway, <b>she could NOT have known what the next ten hours would hold.</b> If Sarah Palin was 35 weeks pregnant on April 17th, given her obstetric history, not only was it possible she would give birth within ten hours of her membranes rupturing, <b>it was probable. </b><br /><br />... I can accept - and always have - that someone in Palin's position might try to give the speech. MIGHT, though the image of an amniotic fluid "leak" turning into a full-fledged rupture while on stage certainly would have dissuaded me personally. (If you wonder what I'm talking about, dump approximately one and a half quarts of yellowish pinkish kinda funky smelling liquid between YOUR legs all at once. Now picture this happening WHILE giving a speech to other governors. Hmmm. Sort of wrecks the professional aura, doesn't it?)<br /><br />But no one will ever convince me - ever! - that the image-conscious governor of Alaska risked having to lie down in public, spread her legs, and grunting and panting in a messy puddle of amniotic fluid, mucous, blood, urine and possibly either the baby's excrement, her own, or both, push her baby out on the carpet in the aisle. Risked her own health and her baby's. … And taken this chance not once, but twice, on two separate four hour flights.<br /><br />… And consider this: If you are going to put this forward - that Sarah Palin recklessly endangered the life of her child - you're going to have to be able to offer some plausible explanation for why she did it. That has never happened. Sarah Palin has NEVER offered any credible or even remotely believable explanation as to <b>WHY. WHAT was her utterly compelling reason for getting on the airplane? </b>WHY did she chance this medically risky and humiliating scenario?<br /><br />So that her child could be born in Alaska.<br /><br />This is the only reason she has ever offered. So that her child could be born in Alaska. (Or to quote the succinct Todd, "You can't have a fish picker [commercial fisherman] from Texas.") This makes no sense. It is in fact one of the dumbest things I have ever heard.<br /><br />..If the events of April 17, 2008 occurred as described, at 2 PM on that day when she got an airplane to return to Alaska, she could not know what would happen during the next eight hours. This is the risk the Sarah Palin would not take. <b>This is the risk she did not take.</b>"<br /><br />http://www.palindeception.com/blog/2009/06/pulling-palin-my-response-to.html<br /><br />And Andrew, the point is not merely whether Trig survived (of course he did, because he was never on any airplane the day before being born). <br /><br />The point is that Sarah Palin is an evil liar who cannot be trusted. That is the cold reality of the situation.Lidianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-49532788257907342572010-08-25T08:30:39.053-04:002010-08-25T08:30:39.053-04:00Andrew, you have completely lost the plot.
Palin ...Andrew, you have completely lost the plot.<br /><br />Palin said (in her book) "the worst thing in the world would be that I would lose him".<br /><br />If that's the case (as it would be for any pregnant woman who's CHOSEN to carry to term) then when your water breaks, you GO TO THE DOCTOR or hospital or midwife or back to your hotel bathroom, even. <br /><br />You prepare for the child to arrive at any minute, because once you start having contractions AND fluid leaking, birth could come AT ANY TIME.<br /><br />You don't spend the day in meetings and then get on two airplanes for a cross-country trip. Sarah Palin is the only 8-months-pregnant, amniotic-fluid-leaking woman in history to do so. <br /><br />Find me another amniotic-fluid-leaking woman who's casually gotten on an airplane, even for a trip of an hour. Just one. You can't!<br /><br />Men, especially, seem to have a hard time understanding this, and it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO with being pro-choice or anti-abortion. <br /><br />Sarah's story makes no sense no matter which way you look at it.Lidianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-34129839711555428902010-08-17T10:41:24.475-04:002010-08-17T10:41:24.475-04:00Wait a second --aren't you all pro--choice? He...Wait a second --aren't you all pro--choice? Her body, her choice, right? So you are horrified there wasn't a NICU available for the birth but don't bat an eye at 90% of these fetuses being aborted? At least Trig is alive! So tearing apart Downs Syndrome fetuses limb from limb in the womb--good. Taking a flight that might lead to labor complications--most evil women on earth. Does the fetus matter or not? Please make up your mind.Andrew Ryannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-13136881092316532842010-07-25T18:22:48.736-04:002010-07-25T18:22:48.736-04:00I don't believe Palin's birth story. I am...I don't believe Palin's birth story. I am a mother of two children. Both were born after I was in my mid-thirties. I was offered amniocentesis because of my age and I declined - and I am pro-choice, not a self-proclaimed pro-lifer like Sarah Palin. I chose to take no risks, no matter how small with my pregnancies, and it just doesn't make sense that PAlin had an amniocentesis done, (at 12 weeks?). She kept the pregnancy hidden so it was not done for the benefit of preparing her family for a Down syndrome child. Her whole story just makes no sense. I cannot believe the people of Alaska let her get away with such a colossal fraud.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-37591514581546089842010-07-14T16:36:14.060-04:002010-07-14T16:36:14.060-04:00The odds of a woman giving birth to a child with D...<i>The odds of a woman giving birth to a child with Down's Syndrome increase with increasing maternal age. Again, she was 43 years old. </i><br /><br />That's not any sort of evidence that Sarah Palin was the 40-year-old woman who gave birth to Trig.Chethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17346211729459692778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-42630582666738132922010-07-12T00:31:11.347-04:002010-07-12T00:31:11.347-04:00Hello Dr.
If you're still intrigued by the Gr...Hello Dr.<br /><br />If you're still intrigued by the Greatest (for lack of a better term) Political Hoax ever perpetrated in the history of the world, check out this interview with Bree Palin. Hard facts are hard to deny or explain away:<br /><br />http://palinbabygate.blogspot.com/2010/07/interview-with-bree-palin.htmlImmaculate Deceptionnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-91611723449870416162010-07-08T13:32:21.363-04:002010-07-08T13:32:21.363-04:00Another reason to disbelieve her is that the hospi...Another reason to disbelieve her is that the hospital did not list the birth (as it usually does) on its website. Why not, if the child were really born there? It's the governor's child, and "privacy" can hardly be an issue, especially since the Palins summoned KTUU to the hospital that same day to document the hallway "presentation". Someone even had the presence of mind to block out time for "Bristol interview"...!<br /><br />http://palingates.blogspot.com/2009/09/levi-johnston-lori-tipton-and-their.html<br /><br />>>Sarah Palin's official schedule from the 18th April, 2008, ... was obtained through a FOIA request, and this page can be viewed here:<br /><br />http://tinyurl.com/luab5z<br /><br />On the top of the schedule for the 18th April 2008 it says:<br /><br />“Bristol: Interview Assistance Set Up w/KTUU (Wasilla)<br />GOV: Interview w/KTVA and ADN (ANC)<br />Todd: Interview w/KBYR (Wasilla)<br />Trig's Birth<br />WASILLA”<br /><br />What does "Interview Assistance" with Bristol and KTUU mean? And I have never ever seen interviews by Sarah Palin or Todd Palin which were conducted on that day!<br /><br />When were these appointments which are mentioned in the schedule set up? How did people know that the premature DS-baby would have been "fit" to be presented to the public at the day of his birth?<<<br /><br />------------------<br />All the Palins needed to fake this birth were scarves, cushions, the hospital hallway for a few moments, and a handful of collaborators motivated by fear of crossing Sarah? greed?? shame? power? religion? <br /><br />Whatever is behind it.. the Trigs were born elsewhere at different times, neither on April 18 at the Mat-Su hospital.Lidianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-26292549125066951272010-07-06T14:24:15.485-04:002010-07-06T14:24:15.485-04:00In "Going Rogue," she described her stat...In "Going Rogue," she described her state during the Texas speech as "Big laughs. More contractions."<br /><br />Leaking amniotic fluid (whether or not it could be described as "running down her legs), having early and multiple incidences of what she (a woman who knows, since she gave birth to four previous children) described as "contractions," carrying a special needs child, and Sarah Palin doesn't go to a hospital to get checked out?<br /><br />She also doesn't accept Gov. Perry's offer of his private plane, which would have allowed her to avoid long waits at the airport, public scrutiny, and possible embarrassment(labor and delivery is loud and messy) and which could be rerouted to the closest hospital if necessary.<br /><br />She's lying, either about the amniotic fluid and the contractions or about being pregnant in the first place.<br /><br />Sarah Palin is supremely narcissistic. There is no way she would put herself in the possible position of lying in the aisle of a plane with her skirt hiked up and her legs in the air.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-4489003279879569202010-07-05T19:24:52.225-04:002010-07-05T19:24:52.225-04:00Anon 4:17, or are you Dangerous? I get the impress...Anon 4:17, or are you Dangerous? I get the impression that you take offense. This strikes me funny in light of all. There's always someone who somehow gets a little too detached or is it too attached?!<br /><br />Just love the part about being disappointed in Buckeye. FYI, just that one line pretty much discredits you, eh, were you needing credit?<br /><br />-SCRNAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-6195022057235076842010-07-05T16:17:52.170-04:002010-07-05T16:17:52.170-04:00First, a couple of corrections:
Sarah Palin's...First, a couple of corrections:<br /><br />Sarah Palin's personal physicin, Dr. Cathy Baldwin-Johnson, is <i>not</i> an OB-Gyn. It is unclear whether she is even qualified to handle a multiple high-risk pregnancy -- as in a 40+ yer-old woman with multiple miscarriages in her medical history carrying a DS infant. That alone makes it likely that all this never happened. I doubt any doctor in good standing would take on such a patient circumstance without the requisite expertise.<br /><br />Second, the DS child ratio for older woman is ridiculous cart-before-the-horse reasoning. I'd expect better from a doctor. My wife is over 40. Does that make her Trig's mother if she claimed to be? Just because a child has DS doesn't make it any more likely that the mother was over 40. Most DS baby are born to younger women because younger women have more babies than women over 40. So ANY child born is probably born to a woman <i>under</i> 40. Trig's DS has none, zero, probative value a to the age (or identity) of his mother. Only fools use such an argument.<br /><br />Since we are talking about medicine here, let's consider ALL the medical evidence, including the Sarah Palin's incredible ability to hide her "pregnancy" for months and months, even though she is surrounded by people all the time. For some incredible reason, she showed no outward signs <i>at all</i> into her self-proclaimed 7th month. All indications after that in public are neatly camouflaged behind big scarves, big coats, etc.<br /><br />This evidence, combined with the wild ride story, makes it incredibly implausible that she was ever actually pregnant, much less with a high-risk pregnancy and given her physique. The evidence is COMPLETELY consistent with a faked pregnancy, however. And nobody can offer an a shread of confirmable evidence that she was ever pregnant. No medical records, nobody who saw her leaving her doctor after a pre-natal visit. No technician who did Trig's amnio. Zip. I'm no fool. In this case, lack of affirmative evidence should be enough proof.<br /><br />Fortunately, however, we have affirmative medical proof that Sarah Palin has presented two different infants as Trig. You can find the photographic evidence -- i.e., Trig's ear -- on multiple sites. She holds one baby with an major ear deformity on the cover of People magazine in May of 2008, and at the RNC in November, Trig' ear has no deformity. Case closed. All any defender can do is argue -- without proof again -- that the ear might have fixed itself or "babies" ears are folded. What a bunch of nonsense.<br /><br />Sarah Palin lied about being pregnant. Who Trig's real mother is may have been her motive or maybe not. The mother might have been one of her daughters, or maybe not. It's not incumbent on us to prove who the real mother was to answer the question of whether it was Sarah Palin or not. She was not. That's not a theory. It's a reasonable (and correct) conclusion based on the evidence.<br /><br />I (and others, including Andrew Sulliven) care not whether we are called names or thought crazy by those who close their eyes to logic and the truth. Worse yet are those who have rationalized that somehow the search for truth is wrong for one reason or another. MSM has decided that.<br /><br />I expect a mea culpa from everyone who doubted us when the truth finally comes out and is incontrovertible.<br /><br />DangerousAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-44656980518224369222010-07-05T16:17:52.169-04:002010-07-05T16:17:52.169-04:00First, a couple of corrections:
Sarah Palin's...First, a couple of corrections:<br /><br />Sarah Palin's personal physicin, Dr. Cathy Baldwin-Johnson, is <i>not</i> an OB-Gyn. It is unclear whether she is even qualified to handle a multiple high-risk pregnancy -- as in a 40+ yer-old woman with multiple miscarriages in her medical history carrying a DS infant. That alone makes it likely that all this never happened. I doubt any doctor in good standing would take on such a patient circumstance without the requisite expertise.<br /><br />Second, the DS child ratio for older woman is ridiculous cart-before-the-horse reasoning. I'd expect better from a doctor. My wife is over 40. Does that make her Trig's mother if she claimed to be? Just because a child has DS doesn't make it any more likely that the mother was over 40. Most DS baby are born to younger women because younger women have more babies than women over 40. So ANY child born is probably born to a woman <i>under</i> 40. Trig's DS has none, zero, probative value a to the age (or identity) of his mother. Only fools use such an argument.<br /><br />Since we are talking about medicine here, let's consider ALL the medical evidence, including the Sarah Palin's incredible ability to hide her "pregnancy" for months and months, even though she is surrounded by people all the time. For some incredible reason, she showed no outward signs <i>at all</i> into her self-proclaimed 7th month. All indications after that in public are neatly camouflaged behind big scarves, big coats, etc.<br /><br />This evidence, combined with the wild ride story, makes it incredibly implausible that she was ever actually pregnant, much less with a high-risk pregnancy and given her physique. The evidence is COMPLETELY consistent with a faked pregnancy, however. And nobody can offer an a shread of confirmable evidence that she was ever pregnant. No medical records, nobody who saw her leaving her doctor after a pre-natal visit. No technician who did Trig's amnio. Zip. I'm no fool. In this case, lack of affirmative evidence should be enough proof.<br /><br />Fortunately, however, we have affirmative medical proof that Sarah Palin has presented two different infants as Trig. You can find the photographic evidence -- i.e., Trig's ear -- on multiple sites. She holds one baby with an major ear deformity on the cover of People magazine in May of 2008, and at the RNC in November, Trig' ear has no deformity. Case closed. All any defender can do is argue -- without proof again -- that the ear might have fixed itself or "babies" ears are folded. What a bunch of nonsense.<br /><br />Sarah Palin lied about being pregnant. Who Trig's real mother is may have been her motive or maybe not. The mother might have been one of her daughters, or maybe not. It's not incumbent on us to prove who the real mother was to answer the question of whether it was Sarah Palin or not. She was not. That's not a theory. It's a reasonable (and correct) conclusion based on the evidence.<br /><br />I (and others, including Andrew Sulliven) care not whether we are called names or thought crazy by those who close their eyes to logic and the truth. Worse yet are those who have rationalized that somehow the search for truth is wrong for one reason or another. MSM has decided that.<br /><br />I expect a mea culpa from everyone who doubted us when the truth finally comes out and is incontrovertible.<br /><br />DangerousAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-35510624492046783442010-07-04T22:41:24.508-04:002010-07-04T22:41:24.508-04:00Nowhere in the article is SP reported as saying sh...Nowhere in the article is SP reported as saying she had big contractions, rather that there were signs but not active labour. Been there, done that, I know what she means.<br />But what a clever GOP stategy it would be, to keep otherwise intelligent people pre-occupied with proving such theories.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-15960807294908687952010-07-04T17:54:19.714-04:002010-07-04T17:54:19.714-04:00The point, anon 11:51, isn't that, ultimately ...The point, anon 11:51, isn't that, ultimately Trig was born without complication. The point is that, disaster could have struck at any point and Sarah and Todd took that risk with the life of their precious unborn baby. <br /><br />Sarah has reported that she gave the speech while having "big" contractions and that she was leaking amniotic fluid. <br /><br />Any sane woman would have hightailed it to the nearest hospital to get checked out. <br /><br />Sarah Palin is not a sane woman, it's true, but I think her insanity in this case runs along the line of lying about being pregnant in the first place.<br /><br />In the end, however, any way you slice the situation, you have a person who is unfit to hold office...maybe unfit to even be a parent, given other evidence.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-16414860082218640162010-07-04T14:04:01.541-04:002010-07-04T14:04:01.541-04:00But you say, Dr Buckeye, that you think a hoax is ...But you say, Dr Buckeye, that you think a hoax is the least likely scenario, that she was probably PG. I beg to differ. She was not PG with Trig.<br /><br />I want to repeat a hilarious (to me) quote from Palin Deception: Audrey, the writer of that blog, described in all its messy detail what would happen if a woman were to deliver on a plane: lying on the floor; no meds for pain; lots of blood and fluids, pretty hideous; cabin pressure an add'l risk, esp for baby; risk of death for both baby and Mom. And she asked "why was SP not worried about any of this as she boarded her long flights to AK [if her water had in fact broken]?" Answering, "for the same reason I am not worried about such consequences when I board a plane -- because I know I am not pregnant."<br /><br />The airplane staff did not notice a pregnant SP, did not see someone run to the restroom multiple times, did not have to offer a bigger seat belt -- because SP's pregnancy was in her luggage, not on her body. (Imagine going through Security with your Gusty-photo giant-fake-belly on, and being stopped and searched. No, it must surely have been small-belly-plus-scarf time for the flight.)<br /><br />The Wild Ride was wild only in retrospect, a story she seems to be making up on the fly in that interview/recording, resulting from some comment she must have made to her father, who repeated "amniotic fluid" to the press, to the woman who interviewed SP.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-80929192925376659892010-07-04T13:11:27.888-04:002010-07-04T13:11:27.888-04:00So "courage": yes, anyone who makes thi...So "courage": yes, anyone who makes this obvious point -- that she hoaxed us all -- is saying something that some powerful people would rather remain unsaid.<br /><br />Remember when Woodward and Bernstein were trying to get the Washington Post to go with the Watergate story? And editor Ben Bradlee would not let them? At one point, Bradlee thought they should print it, and he went to Katherine Graham, who had the courage to say GO. The NYT had the story too but did not proceed with it until after the Washington Post had broken it and made it safe. What if Katherine Graham had been a wimp and said "NO, Mitchell won't like it, and my advertisers won't like it. No." (Remember, when Atty Gen Mitchell heard what was about to be printed he threatened Graham with the "Katie will have her tit in a wringer" [if she prints it] comment, but to no avail: she went ahead anyway, risking the wrath and denial of Mitchell). <br /><br />So something has to happen to break through this wall of noncoverage. Good to have an MD on record about it, so thank you! Is there reason to be intimidated? Not sure, but PalinDeception stopped due to a threat, as I understand it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-10855539602853585442010-07-04T13:09:23.351-04:002010-07-04T13:09:23.351-04:00The puzzling lack of MSM coverage of any part of b...The puzzling lack of MSM coverage of any part of babygate suggests some kind of collusion to keep it undiscussed. IMHO.<br /><br />Yes, it could be lack of interest. But lack of interest in the hoax of the decade? The hoax of the last election? Lack of interest by the same MSM that covered Edwards' issues way past the point when he was politically of any consequence? I doubt it.<br /><br />Other people claim lack of interest because they are sure SP will self-destruct. The well educated take this view. Plenty of reason to think so, but look how successful she's been for the past year. She's doing just great, in spite of everything. People said the same about Hitler in his early stage, that he was a fool who would soon be gone.<br /><br />I think it's more a matter of some top-down guidance at MSM: "don't cover this." By the fat cats who are using Palin, much as Hitler was supported by powerful background folks in the early part of his rise, who have an interest in keeping Palin viable as an energizer of a certain part of the electorate.<br /><br />How else to explain the lack of coverage in this hoax? <br /><br />I say "hoax" based on this info:<br /><br /><a href="http://i40.tinypic.com/oaci2h.jpg" rel="nofollow">http//i40.tinypic.com/oaci2h.jpg</a> <br /><br />So "courage": yes, anyone who makes this obvious point -- that she hoaxed us all -- is saying something that some powerful people would rather remain unsaid.<br /><br />Remember when Woodward and Bernstein were trying to get the Washington Post to go with the Watergate story? And editor Ben Bradlee would not let them? At one point, Bradlee thought they should print it, and he went to Katherine Graham, who had the courage to say GO. The NYT had the story too but did not proceed with it until after the Washington Post had broken it and made it safe. What if Katherine Graham had been a wimp and said "NO, Mitchell won't like it, and my advertisers won't like it. No." (Remember, when Atty Gen Mitchell heard what was about to be printed he threatened Graham with the "Katie will have her tit in a wringer" [if she prints it] comment, but to no avail: she went ahead anyway, risking the wrath and denial of Mitchell). <br /><br />So something has to happen to break through this wall of noncoverage. Good to have an MD on record about it, so thank you! Is there reason to be intimidated? Not sure, but PalinDeception stopped due to a threat, as I understand it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-6769307288706676942010-07-04T10:42:16.392-04:002010-07-04T10:42:16.392-04:00Thanks for all the comments. I guess I don't ...Thanks for all the comments. I guess I don't get what's "courageous" about writing this up. Is there a secret Palinista Mob out there that will track me down and make me an offer I can't refuse? I don't get it. You all have me nervous now.Jeffrey Parks MD FACShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15650563299849196122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-85669579251739219172010-07-03T23:51:55.138-04:002010-07-03T23:51:55.138-04:00Fun topic, but what a truck load of conspiracy the...Fun topic, but what a truck load of conspiracy theories!<br />Just read the transcript. Does say "amniotic fluid leaking" but does not say "running down her legs". Does say that she consulted her doctor pre-flight and on arriving at hospital was told, correctly, that it could be "tonight or in the morning", no crisis. Nothing to see here folks, move along.<br />And how much worse could it be than 42's "I did not have sex with that woman"?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-42774101277665798932010-07-03T22:39:33.242-04:002010-07-03T22:39:33.242-04:00I think she did not release her medical records be...I think she did not release her medical records because she probably had her tubes tied after Piper was born.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-55304072756330250272010-07-03T21:34:56.870-04:002010-07-03T21:34:56.870-04:00Thank you for commenting, Doctor.
I'm another...Thank you for commenting, Doctor.<br /><br />I'm another one who has been observing this hoax from the beginning: the photos show SP was not pregnant. That she lied initially, lied repeatedly, and continues to lie. And far more important, others are letting her lie to perpetuate her hoax: the MaCain campaign staff, starting with McCain himself (where does the buck stop these days, anyway?), the MSM, the MD whose fake letter was issued right before the election; the GOP leadership. Eventually it will all come out, but I am truly shocked that it's taking so long. I guess Edwards and Clinton took a long time too. No one wants to believe these things, but we need to have the truth prevail re our leaders, and those who aspire to be our leaders, unless we want to be led by liars. <br /><br />Thank you for your courage to speak out on an obviously unpopular, yet important, topic.<br /><br />--Amy1Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-42002040431447007182010-07-03T12:13:14.504-04:002010-07-03T12:13:14.504-04:00All of it is strange for me, but this is another d...All of it is strange for me, but this is another detail I'm not sure anyone has mentioned.<br /><br />Palin was in active labor during her speech, at least according to Palin's own account in Going Rogue. Later that day Palin sat in the Seattle airport waiting for the plane to Anchorage. In and out of "active labor" I'd assume. Instead she was observed sitting CALMLY reading a book and did not appear in labor. Now, I've been in labor and even the moments that I was in between contractions, I was not calmly sitting anywhere. I was breathing and waiting for that next moment. Anyone could tell I was in the middle of something and it wasn't the plot of a book! Especially 12 hours after my water broke. <br /><br />This account was written by one of her supporters who sent Todd an email after hearing about the birth. He congratulated them and referenced having seen them at the airport. It can be verified by any skeptics. It is included in one of the emails that was released by MSNBC from their FOIA request. You can Google this directly or look in the archives of Mudflats, Palingate, or TheImmoralMinority whose posts link right to the PDF document.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2760353953251845523.post-84907480442958619372010-07-03T01:19:41.175-04:002010-07-03T01:19:41.175-04:00Hello Dr.
What proved it for me was back in Aug. ...Hello Dr.<br /><br />What proved it for me was back in Aug. '08, when the McCain camp was scrubbing websites at break-neck speed. Then, there was the medical "note" Palin issued at the 11 1/2 hour, just before the polls opened on Nov. 4th.<br /><br />There was one media outlet that was brave enough to at least report the "story":<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvZeL-jFpF0&NR=1Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com