Two more Sarah Palin smears debunked!
Posted by Carlos C. on Saturday, September 6th, 2008 at 2:10 am
The first smear is about a generic list of books that Sarah Palin supposedly wanted to ban while she was Mayor of Wasilla. The actual story does not amount to a “scandal”, as liberals are so desperately trying to find, especially since the librarian that Sarah Palin wanted to fire did not get fired. Also, the list contains several books published in the 21st century that Sarah Palin wanted to “ban” as Mayor in 1996. The math does not add up, folks.
The second smear revolves around the reason why Scott Richter, Sarah Palin’s alleged lover, sealed his divorce documents and records. Turns out that they were never lovers and that Mr. Richter sealed his court documents because he does not want to be contacted by the media. The documents contain Mr. Richter’s home address, work address, and personal phone numbers. Mr. Richter says that the media has intruded into his private life and into the life of his 11-year-old son. Mr. Richter took this necessary action to protect his son from the liberal media hordes.
Keep trying, liberals.
Hat Tips: Say Anything Blog and Hot Air
UPDATE 1: Michelle Malkin says that Palin Derangement Syndrome strikes again!
Also, that list of books has been circulating around the internet for years!
UPDATE 2: This is how the myths are debunked - follow along please.
The supposedly list of the books that Sarah Palin wanted to “ban” in 1996 contain books published in the late 90’s and 2000’s. How can Sarah Palin ban books that have not even been published? That is how the rumor is debunked.
Also, Mr. Richter has come out and stated the reason why he made his court documents private is to protect his son. Follow this link to The Smoking Gun website and you will read why Mr. Richter sealed his court documents.
As I stated in my original post, both myths are debunked. Again.
(1 Ratings)
Filed Under: News & Politics
September 6th, 2008 at 2:15 am
Oh they’re going to keep trying because McCain’s pick of a true conservative and woman to boot, has the democrats caught with their pants down and they’re running on empty when it comes to how to get their “groove back.”
Maybe Obama should build another styrofoam castle and give a speech in front of it!
September 6th, 2008 at 3:40 am
Welcome to the world of irrational partisan hatred in the Establishment Media. They’re pissed off because they wanted to have a Democrat female executive. They don’t know how to play nice so they should be cut off, financially, let us tell the advertisers not to do business with these outlets till the likes of the Associated Pricks and Most Soitenly Nuthin’ But Crap put a muzzle on hateful hacks like No-Balls Matthews!
September 6th, 2008 at 3:51 am
Typical Liberal Bullshit! I want to know why they have not probed and asked Barack Obama in the past 18 Months about his association with William Ayers (Terrorist who attempted to blow up the White House & his organization MURDERED Police by bombing their headquarters).
That is association with blood on his hands.
Instead, they are trying to undermine Sarah Palin. Why are they not AGGRESSIVELY probing Obama with his very suspect & shady background?
DAMN Liberal HYPOCRITES!
- Doc
September 6th, 2008 at 5:10 am
how have you debunked these myths. you havent proved anything, its rather vague. Im not a liberal before anyone starts any abuse, and im voting for mccain… but to be fair on them its usually our right wing media that is dominant and doing the same to them. you cant blame them to be honest. the fact is i think it was a smart move, however risky by mccain to appoint her as VP and it will attract some more voters and has helped energise the base. however it has also lost some voters as is shown by obama getting record donations the day after the speech. i think she shouldnt be there, amoung the false points the liberals have put forward about her the fact that mccain has had cancer and she could easily become president is NOT good. shes just not ready (same as obama). i hope she can stand up in the debate against joe biden.
September 6th, 2008 at 5:13 am
To the first 3 commentors: comon guys some of that stuff is just as ignorant as what these liberal @&*holes are coming up with recently, lets focus on the important stuff.
September 6th, 2008 at 5:15 am
Eh… Regarding the book banning “myth,” you just repeated the myth and said it was debunked.
What?
September 6th, 2008 at 10:31 am
geez! i hadn’t even heard about these accusations yet, there’s something new every minute isn’t there? what a bunch of shit.
September 6th, 2008 at 11:28 am
To the Anonymous Poster:
No offense, but you said we haven’t “proved anything” which leads me to believe that you didn’t read the post and/or the things that were linked to.
First the divorce records were sealed. All of the info that may or may not implicate Palin in those records are unavailable to the media. So anyone presenting allegations as facts, without having access to those records, is doing so without any evidence.
Second, the banned book list. She was said to ban those books in 1996. However, many of the books on the list were written long after that. How could she ban books that weren’t written yet?
September 6th, 2008 at 11:30 am
Wootman, take a deep breath and read the article again slowly. I know the public schools we attended focused more on feeling good about ourselves than about learning but I just know you can follow it little trooper..
From the article:
“list contains several books published in the 21st century that Sarah Palin wanted to “ban” as Mayor in 1996″
To make it more clear, 1996 was in the 20th century not the 21st century so the generic myth that is going around that includes a specific list of books she attempted to ban implies she was banning books years before they were written. There is currently scientific consensus that time flows linearly forward (or at least is perceived that why by humans) so the original myth is disproved.
In fairness, this debunk article (and several like it) do sort of fall short but no more so than the original myth itself. It is of course a bit difficult to prove someone did *not* do something..
I suspect there is some real truth in the original myth but the fact that the original assertion against Palin includes a made up list rather than a specific book or two either means people can’t find the specifics or the attackers are worried that with the specifics, the attack would not be nearly as effective.
I suspect that even a large number of freedom loving liberals would have some sympathy for Palin if the book she was banning was titled “Sally has two mommies so she killed them because lesbianism is a sin”.
While many of us are certainly willing to fight for freedom of speech even when it is as offensive as my example, those of us who are sane do not think that fighting for freedom of speech means that we have to support tax dollars being used to buy and distribute hate inspiring literature for first graders.
Note I am not saying that I know a list of books she banned and I agree with the list or even that I know that there even is a list but as far as dispelling the original myth, this puff piece response is more than what is (currently) required.
September 6th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Thanks Jeff.
September 6th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
yea- the dems have been loosing their groove since slick willy