Posted on | April 21, 2011 | 26 Comments
Decent Americans recoil in shock at the latest eruption of Palin Derangment Syndrome in which Wonkette’s Jack Steuf wrote:
Today is the day we come together to celebrate the snowbilly grifter’s magical journey from Texas to Alaska to deliver to the America the great gentleman scholar Trig Palin. Is Palin his true mother? Or was Bristol? (And why is it that nobody questions who the father is? Because, either way, Todd definitely did it.)
As I say, I’ve met Todd Palin, and I’d love to see one of these clowns say some crap like that to his face.
UPDATE: Dana Loesch reports that advertisers are dropping Wonkette. Remarkably, in reporting that Steuf has been put on probation, Wonkette publisher Ken Layne attempts to justify the smears on the Palins, prompting Da Tech Guy to observe:
The first rule of civility for the left is this, any statement no matter how vile or misogynistic that is directed against the Palin family is OK.
Frankly, I’ve never seen anything like it. Not in all the years of Bush Derangement Syndrome did the Left unload as much concentrated hate as they’ve piled onto Sarah Palin since August 2008.
UPDATE II: There were many other things I’d intended to blog about this morning, but Ken Layne’s reaction is just so astonishing that I feel the need to extend this post. William Jacobson at Legal Insurrection quotes Layne:
I wouldn’t parade my children around in the media. What kind of mother does that? . . . Trig is cool with us. Sarah Palin, on the other hand, is a grave danger to America.
And it is Palin’s “grave danger” that, in Layne’s demented mind, justifies the no-holds-barred anti-Palin attacks.
Let me address this from a couple of different angles. I have been known, from time to time, to make intemperate or ill-advised remarks, including jokes of questionable taste. When I loathe somebody, I don’t bother to disguise my loathing, and so I would be a hypocrite if I posed as having been a model of civility toward, inter alia, Meghan McCain.
However, Meghan has thrust herself into the public eye, tried to make herself a spokesperson for conservatism, and generally cashed in on her inherited importance, so she bought her own ticket to this dance, you see. I sure as hell don’t need a 20-something bubblehead lecturing me about political philosophy, so Meghan “Don’t You Know Who I Am?” McCain has arguably invited whatever insults I’ve thrown her way (which have been numerous, and ROTFLMAO funny, I might add).
So that’s one political child who has been “paraded around in the media.” What about Chelsea Clinton? I’ve met Chelsea, who is absolutely charming in person. Is there anyone who would deny that Chelsea was, in some sense, used as a campaign prop by her parents over the years? Indeed, aren’t there many observers who have depicted Bill and Hillary’s marriage as more a political partnership than an actual marriage?
There was a time, circa 2005-07, when Republicans demonized Hillary Clinton almost as thoroughly as Democrats now demonize Sarah Palin. But if any conservative commentator dragged Chelsea through the mud the way liberals have done with the Trig-Truther stuff, I must have missed it.
And something else: By the time I started covering Hillary’s campaign in March 2008, she was already fighting for her political survival and I found myself — despite my every partisan or ideological instinct — admiring her feisty determination. When she got to Shepherdstown, W.Va., in early May, the press corps was more or less demanding that Hillary quit the race. It was painful to see Chelsea have to stand next to her mother at that press conference while reporters peppered Hillary with variations of the same question: “Why don’t you quit, loser?”
Because you see, Hillary had the temerity oppose the anointing of Obama and, just as Ken Layne says of Sarah Palin, that made Hillary a “grave danger to America” in the eyes of the Obamaphiliac press.
Liberals think we’re stupid, but we’re not too stupid to see what they’re doing or to understand why they’re doing it.