Over at The Jackson Free Press, Madame DeLadd invents new lies as she attempts to smear Republican Vice Presidential nominee and Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. Governor Palin has been the victim of vicious rumors on the internet claiming her baby is actually her daughter's child. Donna Ladd, who hates all things Republican, can not control herself and wades into the fray with the following post:
"Those rumors that went around over the last few days about Palin perhaps being the mother of young trig, and not the grandmother, apparently started on right-wing radio in Alaska in recent months. She definitely seems to have massive family drama, real or unproved.
posted by ladd on 09/01/08 at 02:43 PM" / http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/index.php/site/comments/bristol_palin_unmarried_and_17_is_pregnant/
This claim is a flat-out lie and an attempt by Ms. Ladd to smear Ms. Palin. In case one hasn't noticed from her posts over the years, Ms. Ladd reserves a special degree of hatred and contempt for conservative women as she undoubtedly sees them as traitors to The Cause.
The fact is the left-wing blogs started these rumors on the internet as Ladd's fellow netroots have decided nothing in Governor Palin's life is off-limits to their slander. A google search of "Palin, pregnancy" will reveal a multitude of "progressive" websites publicizing the rumor as fact. Ms. Ladd lies when she says the rumors began on right-wing talk radio as she tries to smear conservatives for the rumors her friends started. This post from the Daily Kos shows who started this filth, contrary to Ms. Ladd's falsehoods:
Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:12:31 PM PDTWell, Sarah, I'm calling you a liar. And not even a good one. Trig Paxson Van Palin is not your son. He is your grandson. The sooner you come forward with this revelation to the public, the better.....
Funny quote on her having no desire for the Vice-Presidency aside, the article is direly clear. No one knew she was pregnant, not even her own staff. Quite a feat. Why the secrecy? Sarah has never given an answer, and upon further reading, no one has bothered to ask.
Seven months into a pregnancy, and no one noticed.
Even Harry Houdini would be impressed.
And how could anyone tell? Sarah's waistline never changed. Her wardrobe still remained tight and professional. In a video posted in February (nearing five months of pregnancy at the time), Sarah is seen trim, and walking around all of Juneau, Alaska...." http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/30/121350/137/486/580223 (The entire Daily Kos post is published in the comments section. Click on "comments" to read in case Daily Kos removes Artic's rant. )
Daily Kos smears Sarah Palin with filth that any self-respecting journalist, much less one who constantly preaches ethics in journalism as well as bragging about her Master's in Journalism from Columbia, would condemn. Not Ms. Ladd. Instead of condemning her fellow netroots, she makes up a lie and tries to say CONSERVATIVES started the rumors. Ms. Ladd, you lied. period.
PS) Do I need to explain the political leanings of the Daily Kos?
Update: Here she goes again, this time about Feminist for Life, a pro-life Feminist group:
"So, Palin is a member of the virulently anti-abortion (even rape and incest) group, Feminists for Life. They call the pill, the IUD and Plan B "abortifacients."
And here is their position on contraception from their site: Leaving abortion aside for just a moment, even most forms of contraception invade the woman's body, not the man's--and in more cases than we want to admit, scar and irrevocably damage those bodies. (Even condoms, the one "male" form of contraception, usually end up being the woman's responsibility--survey after survey shows that it is invariably women, not men, who are responsible for purchasing condoms.).."
"What Serrin Foster (head of Feminists for Life) will not be advertising during her campus visit is that Feminists for Life is opposed to contraception." http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/index.php/site/comments/bristol_palin_unmarried_and_17_is_pregnant/#c134899
Funny how when I read the website that its position on contraception said the following:
"What is Feminists for Life's position on contraception?
Feminists for Life's mission is to address the unmet needs of women who are pregnant or parenting. Preconception issues including abstinence and contraception are outside of our mission. Some FFL members and supporters support the use of non-abortifacient contraception while others oppose contraception for a variety of reasons. FFL is concerned that certain forms of contraception have had adverse health effects on women.
Our membership enjoys a broad spectrum of opinion that reflects the diversity of opinions among the American public...." http://www.feministsforlife.org/FAQ/index.htm#contraception
I report, you decide.