A/P FACT CHECK: Palin's Book Goes Rogue on Some Facts


Sarah Palin's new book reprises familiar claims from the 2008 presidential campaign that haven't become any truer over time. Ignoring substantial parts of her record if not the facts, she depicts herself as a frugal traveler on the taxpayer's dime, a reformer without ties to powerful interests and a politician roguishly indifferent to high ambition.

Palin goes adrift, at times, on more contemporary issues, too. She criticizes President Barack Obama for pushing through a bailout package that actually was achieved by his Republican predecessor George W. Bush — a package she seemed to support at the time.

Here's a look at some of her statements in "Going Rogue," obtained by The Associated Press in advance of its release Tuesday.

Carrie PreJean Walks Out on Larry King!!

Watch this! She is totally gonna... oh, she's still there.
Well, she's taking off her mic, so...

Ohhh, this is gonna be good!!

She'll show that inappropriate sexist Larry King, who is just one more person trying to take away her 1st Amendment freedoms to set people straight on the opposite marriage!! And NOT the deeply satisfactory sexual pleasures of solo self-gratification (WHICH IS NOT REALLY ACTUALLY SEX, YOU SICK PERVERTS!!)

Yup... there she goes. YOU GO CARRIE!!
Walk right out of there!! Wait, she has something to say.
Then, she'll totally blow this fuckin gay ass clam bake.
Won't you, Carrie!!

You show 'em.
Show 'em all, GOOD!!

Umm... Any minute now...

Carrie? Hello? Can you hear us...?

Carrie Prejean Attempts to Storm Off Larry King, But Is Foiled by the Siren Call of Rolling Cameras - Gawker

The New York Post Is a Hellish Cauldron of Racism, Sexism, and White Rage: Lawsuit

Via Gawker

A former New York Post editor who was fired last month for complaining about a ludicrously racist cartoon has filed a detailed complaint in federal court accusing editor Col Allan of racism, sexism, and all-round dickishiness of the highest order.

Sandra Guzman was an editor at the Post charged with running, among other things, a section aimed at Latino readers. After the paper published a Sean Delonas cartoon depicting President Barack Obama as a chimpanzee being gunned down by white police officers, she complained internally about what she saw as the paper's persistent and overt racism under the leadership of Australian he-man Col Allan. Then she got fired.

Yesterday, she filed a complaint in federal court alleging systematic racism in the Post's hiring, firing, and editorial practices, and depicting Allan as a stupid, giggling frat-boy who likes to show his female employees pictures of naked men for kicks. The complaint has all sorts of damning allegations—you can read the whole thing here, but some of the good bits are below. Guzman has separately filed a complaint against the Post with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The lawsuit comes just one day after the paper fired reporter Austin Fenner, one of the few remaining African-American reporters on the paper's staff—we're told there are just three others, one of whom has been on an extended sick leave for most of the year. We're also told that the paper—a metro daily in New York City—has no African-American editors, and hasn't for nine years. UPDATE: A tipster points out Robert George, an editor on the Post's editorial page, is an African American. Our sources on the Post's demographics were thinking of the news and features pages.

We've contacted the Post to confirm that and for a response to Guzman's complaint, and we'll publish it when we get one.

Here are some of the allegations:

The Post, Guzman says, was a "hostile work environment" for women and non-white staffers, who are subject to "pervasive and systemic discrimination" and "harassment":

Allan's "inappropriate and sexist comments and conduct have been widely known throughout" the Post.

For instance, he likes to show ladies what penises look like. He thinks it's funny!

He also, Guzman says, likes to rub his penis up against his female employees, whether they want him to or not:

Other editors at the paper, following Allan's classy lead, have taken to offering female staffers better jobs in exchange for blow jobs:

Allan's colleague Les Goodstein, a News Corp. senior vice president, thinks latin ladies are hot, and told Guzman so. He also liked to lick his lips while staring at other women's breasts in her presence:

The beef that precipitated Guzman's firing was over a drawing by Sean Delonas, a racist, gay-hating, and—worst of all—astoundingly humorless cartoonist. The Barack-Obama-Is-a-Dead-Chimp cartoon is not his first exceedingly tasteless offering, and at one point, Guzman says, Delonas had the bright idea of depicting Jews as sewer rats, a pitch that apparently got nixed:

Guzman's complaints about the cartoon fell on deaf ears, both because real men don't care about whiny P.C. minority-type people and because she just didn't get that the whole point of the New York Post is to "destroy Barack Obama." At least that's what she says the paper's Washington bureau chief told her:

Col Allan certainly didn't care about P.C. minority-type people: When some of them staged a protest outside his newspaper, he laughed at them because "most of them are minorities and the majority are uneducated." Unlike the Post's highly sophisticated, Sean Delonas-loving readership:

Allan felt the same way about the vanishingly small number of non-white employees he oversees. When one of them approached him to discuss his feelings about the cartoon, Allan simply walked away:

After Guzman made her feelings public in an e-mail stating that she had raised her objections to the cartoon to management—an e-mail that got picked up by the Huffington Post and other blogs—Allan, she says, launched a crusade against her. His animus, according to Guzman, overwhelmed his news judgment. In August, Guzman—who is a personal friend of Justice Sonia Sotomayor—was invited as a guest to a White House reception celebrating Sotomayor's confirmation. No other reporters were to be present. Guzman asked for permission to cover and report on the event, and Allan said no. Granted, her personal relationship and status as a guest would make such an assignment weird, but a) it could have been disclosed and presented as an insider account, and b) since when has the Post cared about conflicts of interest? Especially when they have a chance to get an exclusive about a highly newsworthy event? Of all the transgressions listed in Guzman's complaint, this is perhaps the most shocking—that Allan let his hatred of Obama, Sotomayor, and Guzman kill a potential scoop.

There's much more, so do read the complaint in its entirety. We're sure Rupert Murdoch will, using his sophisticated racism-detecting system to determine that Guzman is full of it. Because if Glenn Beck's not a racist, then Col Allan certainly isn't, right?

UPDATE: The Post has released a statement responding to the complaint.

This lawsuit has no merit and is based on charges that are groundless. As previously stated, Ms. Guzman's position was eliminated when the section she edited was discontinued due to a decline in advertising sales.

Understanding Why Nidal Hasan Did It Makes Us Stronger

Via RudePundit

God, we liberals are such fucking pussies, aren't we? Our vaginas just ache in sympathy with the most heinous people, like Major Nidal Hasan, who massacred soldiers at Fort Hood. Just look at how vile we are behaving: questioning why Hasan did it, attempting to learn from his crime in order to prevent others, wondering if the treatment of Muslims in the military might have a deleterious effect on the mental stability of some soldiers. What's wrong with us? We stink of lamb-like sensitivity when we should be tearing through this world like 'roided out lions.

Right wing pundits offer prima facie evidence of how awful we are as human beings. Like Cal Thomas, who minces, "[W]e tolerate virtually everything, indulge in political correctness and subscribe to a bogus belief that if radical Islamists can see we mean them no harm, they will mean us no harm." (Although the Rude Pundit will stick to his belief that if we offer milkshakes and blow jobs to al-Qaeda members, the wars would be over. Seriously - there's your choice: goat fucking and suicide bombing or milkshakes and blow jobs. Give it 30 seconds.)

And how can we be such quivering little cocksuckers that we don't understand the case is cut-and-dried, dyed-in-the-wool over, with all facts readily available in the media. "It was an act of terrorism by a man with a record of expressing virulent, anti-American, pro-jihadist sentiments. All were conspicuous signs of danger his Army superiors chose to ignore," writes Dorothy Rabinowitz in the Wall Street Journal (motto: "Who knew Rupert Murdoch's taint would taste so deliciously tangy?"). Pat Buchanan is Sam fuckin' Spade (even if he'd find that name insulting), creating an entire narrative and psychological profile of Hasan: "Hasan was conflicted by a dual loyalty—to the country he had sworn to protect, and to his perceived duty as a Muslim." What we learn from all this is that right wingers think that Law and Order is reality and not just a TV show. (By the way, Buchanan goes total bugnuts by mid-column, using Hasan to condemn minorities for not being whiter.)

What a little bitch-ass president, they tell us, with his milquetoast reaction, not-so-secret Muslim plot to destroy us all, and his failure to serve in the military. Ann Coulter practices her cuntistry when she notes, "President Obama’s response to the slaughter of 13 Americans by a Muslim at a U.S. military installation was to instruct Americans not to 'jump to any conclusions.' There was a risk that right-wingers would start playing the old 'Blame The Perpetrator' game." When Obama first spoke, Hasan was unconscious from his wounds. No one knew if he acted alone, had help, was the start or end of something. But, man, when you need to jump, ya gotta jump, unless you're a pussy. You're not a pussy, are you?

Which, of course, leads to Kevin McCullough, conservative spoogebag, who writes, "In the hours following the shooting at Ft. Hood, President Obama demonstrated resolute apathy to the greatest issue of our time." (Bonus points for McCullough's abuse of quotation marks: "[Obama] gave 'shout-outs' to his 'homies' in the crowd." Obama did say "shout-out." He did not say "homies." But, you know, he's black.)

They're disgusted because less than three hours after the shooting, Obama went ahead with a scheduled speech at the Tribal Nations Conference. He commented there on the shooting, "What we do know is that a number of American soldiers have been killed, and even more have been wounded in a horrific outburst of violence. My immediate thoughts and prayers are with the wounded and with the families of the fallen, and with those who live and serve at Fort Hood...I hope in the meantime that all of you recognize the scope of this tragedy, and keep everybody in their thoughts and prayers." His "response" when he asked people not to jump to conclusions was given the next day. It was actually just an update. He didn't need to repeat his horror and outrage, which he had communicated the day before.

Who are these fantasy liberals that conservatives create out of straw? Where do they live? Where do you see anyone not a nutzoid Muslim fundamentalist supporting Hasan? Shit doesn't occur in a vacuum. Life ain't a movie; Hasan, from the meager bit we know about him, wasn't just blankly evil. No one in the liberal camp is forgiving him, but for citizens in and out of the military, it's crucial that we understand Hasan. Skepticism and inquiry aren't ludicrous luxuries. A desire to understand other cultures isn't mere political correctness. That's a shorthand way to dismiss a crucial step forward in a world that has changed significantly in the last few decades.

And the real wimps and weaklings are the ones who resist and refuse to offer anything beyond an assertion of smug superiority. Because, as anyone in any Darwinian enterprise will tell you, they are the long-dying members of a society or species.

You Child Labor Endorsing, Pro-Slavery Freaks

Via Maddow

Shocking resistance by business groups to legislative measures that ban slavery and child exploitation.

Namely: Inside US Trade, The Heritage Foundation and overcriminalized.com

Best "Rachel" line at (06:13)

"...you child labor endorsing, pro-slavery freaks..!!"

Brit Hume Corrects O’Reilly On The Public Option: It’s ‘Kind Of Popular’

Via TP

Last night on Fox News, host Bill O’Reilly and analyst Brit Hume discussed the prospects for the Senate passing a health care reform bill. After struggling with the terminology for the “public option,” O’Reilly ultimately concluded that “all the polls say” that “the folks don’t want it.”

Hume, a regular Fox News misinformer, surprisingly corrected O’Reilly, noting that Americans actually support the public option:

O’REILLY: They call it, you know, the public sector. What is the –

HUME: Public option, you mean?

O’REILLY: Public option, whatever. The folks don’t want it. … But it looks to me like they have maybe 55 votes to pass it. And that means they could be filibustered and never come up for a vote.

HUME: That’s what it looks like right now. The public option, actually some polls show that the public option standing by itself is not at all unpopular, but it is kind of popular. But that depends on how the poll question is raised. … We don’t need to go into all that right now.

Watch it:

Those trying to derail reform with a public option try to claim that Americans don’t support it. “All the polls now indicate substantial opposition to this particular type of health care reform,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said last night on Fox. But Hume is right. Americans do support the public option, as recent polling shows:

CNN/Opinion Research, Oct. 30 – Nov. 1: 55 percent support “creating a public health insurance option administered by the federal government that would compete with plans offered by private health insurance companies.”

Ipsos/McClatchy, Oct. 30 – Nov. 1: 51 percent support the “creation of a public entity to directly compete with existing health insurance companies.”

Other recent polls, such as USA Today/Gallup and Washington Post/ABC News, have found majority support for the public option — results that are consistent with other polling on this question throughout the health care debate this year.

Indeed, large majorities in Connecticut support the public option but Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), the state’s junior independent senator, has repeatedly said he will filibuster any bill that contains a public option. Like Hume, Lieberman doesn’t want to talk about polling support for the public option either, reportedly saying that poll respondents are simply “confused.”

Typical White Folk (Republicans) Are Scared of Me

Ok, see this is WAY different than Barack Obama's comment about "typical white folk". I mean it was like soooo... a little different. It was altogether... uh... not any different at all in any way shape or form. See because many white peoples are terrified of the black peoples. And wide recognition of this fact, makes the "typical" part of "typical white folk" altogether appropriate. Also, nobody has ever used the term "typical black folk" ever. See?

Via Wonkette

Uh oh, you naughty man, Roland Martin, playing the devilish Steele Game again. In today’s edition of “How did Michael Steele take the bait this time,” the communist CNN contributor Roland Martin, in his side gig for a black people thing called NewsOne, interviewed the triumphant cow and dared put forth this snare: “One of the criticisms I’ve always had is Republicans — white Republicans — have been scared of black folks.” Yeah, ever come across anything like that, Michael Steele?

STEELE: You’re absolutely right. I mean I’ve been in the room and they’ve been scared of me. I’m like, “I’m on your side” and so I can imagine going out there and talking to someone like you, you know, [say] “I’ll listen.” And they’re like “Well.” Let me tell you. You saw in Christie and you saw in McDonnell a door open because they went in and engaged.

Just a reminder that the year is 2009, and white people talking to black people is still a controversial issue in the Republican party.

Steele: White Republicans are scared of me [The Hill]

Stupak, Pitts, and the Democrat C-Streeters

Via Maddow

Blindsided By Politicized Religion. Again. And 2010 Looms.

Palin Sees Conspiracy In New Dollar Coins

Via RawStory

It now seems clear why the staff to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin didn't want anyone to bring recording devices or cell phones to her speech Friday night.

Even news outlets like Politico -- which have prominently featured Dick Cheney's terror jeremiads -- would have been likely to lampoon her.

But the ban on recording devices didn't stop them. Politico says they bought three tickets to Palin's Wisconsin speech and then penned a write-up. Their review was somewhat grim, taking aim at Palin's frequent use of the words "bogus" and "awesome" and delivering a strange anecdote about dollar coins.

"Palin had remarks prepared but frequently wandered off-script to make a point, offering audience members a casual “awesome” or “bogus” in discussing otherwise weighty topics," Jonathan Martin wrote in his review.

He quotes Palin as saying, “It is so bogus that society is sending a message right now and has been for probably the last 40 years that a woman isn’t strong enough or smart enough to be able to pursue an education, a career and her rights and still let her baby live.”

"Other Palin touchstones included: praise for the military, jeers for the “the liberal media” and a general manner of speaking that often veered into rhetorical culs-de-sac," he continued.

Palin didn't draw supporters to their feet: "While she drew applause during her remarks, Palin’s extemporaneous and frequently discursive style was such that she never truly roused a true-believing crowd as passionate about the issue at hand as she. Not once during her address did they rise to their feet."

They did stand at the end, however.

She then got a standing ovation from most of the crowd, but a few had begun to leave before she even finished and within seconds of her concluding, scores more got up and put on their jackets as they walked away.

In addition to the suggestion that government officials would consider hastening the death of the infirm or handicapped, she began her remarks with a puzzling commentary on the design of newly minted dollar coins.

Noting that there had been a lot of “change” of late, Palin recalled a recent conversation with a friend about how the phrase “In God We Trust” had been moved to the edge of the new coins.

“Who calls a shot like that?” she demanded. “Who makes a decision like that?”

She added: “It’s a disturbing trend.”

The decision to put "IN GOD WE TRUST" on the edges of presidential dollar coins has received little attention from the press, but was reversed in 2007, before President Barack Obama took office. Sens. Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Robert Byrd (D-WV) sponsored legislation to move the motto back to the front face of the coins.

"It is important that our national motto, 'In God We Trust,' is prominently displayed on all of our currency," Brownback said. "We should not relegate our heritage to the side."

Some of Palin's recent speeches have also received lackluster reviews. At a recent speech in Hong Kong (which also banned the press) some delegates purportedly "walked out in disgust."