BEST IDEA I've heard in a long time!

Double A mentioned this on our radio show today, and I am all for it.

We need to make the politicians wear suits advertising their commercial endorsements, just like the NASCAR drivers do. The more money contributed, the bigger the logo!

In the case of BigPharma, the logo should be that of the most popular, best-selling drug of any given company. For instance, Eli Lilly's biggest seller last year was CYMBALTA, so that word should be suitably emblazoned on the jackets of any and all politicians who took Eli Lilly's generous corporate donations. (This could well have a subliminal effect: Perhaps people will wonder if the politician-in-question is making them depressed?) I personally can't wait for conservative Senator Tom Coburn, who took $7000 from Purdue Pharma, to wear the giant word OXYCONTIN on his belly, as he addresses his constituents. Likewise, how funny would it be if Obama wore the logo ADDERALL XR at his next press conference? (Would he seem more or less authoritative?)

Here are some fashion-forward ideas I discovered, when I searched the web.

From Crooks and Liars:



Like I said, no cheating with PFIZER... it has to say VIAGRA, so everyone will recognize the product. (And frankly, this move might not sell the product as well as playing them sexee blues songs on TV commercials, but maybe Pfizer should start thinking about IMAGE?)

~*~



~*~

From Good.is:



~*~



~*~

Somebody named Captain Obvious contributed this to a political forum, the new Supreme Court robes:



~*~

And from Political Irony:

Anti-feminists defend John Edwards, sex machine and role model

Recent John Edwards photo from the Los Angeles Times.





Hey you scandal-mongering folks out there... who among you is currently following the entertaining John Edwards follies?

Here and here are some fairly decent summations of the corruption trial so far. But I have to say, the hands-down BEST commentary came from a proud Men's Rights Marine over at the GendErratic blog, named Dungone -- who explains to us dumb wimmenz that John Edwards is NOT being publicly tried for funneling campaign funds to his mistress and their child (a violation of campaign-finance laws), but instead is being PUNISHED for having a $400 haircut and ROBUST MALE SEXUALITY!!!

Yes, its the feminists again, who made poor John Edwards take Rielle Hunter as his mistress, and in turn made Rielle refrain from birth control and get knocked up. OUR. FAULT.

Got that, bitches?

I can't do any better than to quote some of our exchange, verbatim. Just in case you think I am some crazy feminist exaggerating what this man has said, let me first link the whole thread HERE. And these are his exact quotes.

Dungone:

[Unlike] women, men are actually mocked for caring about their appearance, such as John Edward for his $400 haircut. [links to Wonkette photo of Edwards] If we were sane, we would acknowledge that a good haircut is a common sense investment for anyone who has to appear in front of a national TV audience on a daily basis – but we are not sane because we cannot even acknowledge that man even have an appearance. The fact that it’s even a political snowball in the first place is ridiculous – regular housewives spend as much money as some male celebrities on their physical appearance and no one thinks it’s a big deal. But men are in a double bind – they have to look good but it has to be a bigger secret than Victoria’s Secret or else they’re screwed.

Me:

Dungone, as someone here in Edwards’ neck of the woods, let me clarify… it was all that down-home populism and I-love-the-poor-folks bullshit of his and THEN the $400 haircut –that brought the scorn. There was a context for that… now when the story went national, maybe they just talked about the haircut… but around HERE, it was in the context of his “fightin for the po folks” reputation and alla that.

Dungone:

Please, don’t give me that. It’s straight up bullshit. All the feminists endorsed Hillary Clinton since she supposedly fought for oppressed women. But how much does she pay for a hair cut? Why was that never an issue? Every woman who runs for public office probably spends way more on haircuts than any man, so I guess if expensive haircuts would make a man into a hypocrite then we shouldn’t even consider voting for a woman.

Of course, regular readers know that I did not back Hillary, so already, he is incorrect about "all the feminists"--and our election-year marching orders.

Dungone knowingly continues:

Don’t you think that $400 is reasonable for a haircut when your election campaign which is costing your backers millions of dollars could easily go down the tube over a bad haircut? Opportunists jump on any deviation from masculine perfection in political campaigns. And people, especially women, will in fact vote for the more handsome male candidate. We haven’t had a bald president since hats went out of fashion and women got the vote. Instead, we’ve had presidents who fucked Marilyn Monroe. But I guess you feminists are going to call men hypocrites for getting a decent haircut while you vote to uphold Sarah Palin in the ranks of pro-women women.

Do you know what the biggest irony is? A $400 haircut is money that goes to support a laborer from the working class. And after that “scandal”, Edwards got a $13 haircut at Supercuts. So let’s be clear – under-paying an employee at a big corporate chain = pro labor. Paying good money for good work = hypocrite. Good call, Daisy. You love workers.

Me: [Yes, my Irish was officially up]

And how long did you live in the Carolinas during the 2008 election season? You are now informing me about what local people were talking about? Excuse me, but you do not live here and you do not have a motherfucking clue. My own HUSBAND voted for Edwards and said that, okay?

...

The biggest irony is that you are defending a man who used his ‘status’ as a poor lint-head to con OTHER poor lint-heads into giving him money, then used that money to pay off his mistress for silence. And you are defending this embezzling piece of shit as a decent man. This is why he is on trial TODAY for embezzling and I hope they lock his ass up for it. Yes, I do love the workers, and I don’t like when some shyster politician can’t keep it zipped and then uses the money of the workers that was collected in good faith, to pay off his fucking sex scandals. And yes, I see why you admire such a person. Of course you do.

Are you going to visit him in prison?

Dungone:

Edwards would have seriously helped the working class and I find it deplorable that working class people would call him a hypocrite basically for no other reason than his physical appearance and personality

Me:

Um, he is ON TRIAL RIGHT NOW for his appearance and personality? Are you tripping? Earth to Dungone.

Dungone: [FOR THE WIN!]

He’s on trial for being a male slut and a $400 haircut. He violated campaign rules, which was wrong, but it’s understandable given that men are judged so harshly and unfairly for their sex lives. There are people sitting fat and happy in their mansion who should be on trial for war crimes and you’re talking about daytime talk show crap, including some of the ones that your neck of the woods sent to public office. But god damn, he didn’t “keep it zipped” so it’s over for him any way you slice it. You’re part of the problem, given that you sound exactly like exactly the kind of person who hates it when a man has a sex life. Stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with what he would do for the working class. Kennedy also had a sex life and he was one of our greatest and most beloved presidents. “Keep it zipped,” you say. What a sexist, bigoted thing to say.

Campaign finance rules are supposed to keep powerful millionaires from buying elections. They’re supposed to prevent politicians from covering up real crimes, conflicts of interest, and scandals that are actually relevant to the task of public office. But they do none of those things. They’re used to bring down men who tried to prevent having their sex lives dragged out in front of the public by their political enemies. You can be a truly evil son of a bitch who tortures people all over the world, fails to do a thing about 9/11… but if you get a blowjob or sent a text message, you get impeached. And here we have Daisy Deadhead crying a river over the way female politicians get judged for their looks.

Again, this is why you should not try to talk to Men's Rights Guys. DO. NOT. ENGAGE! This is a Marine, who in other contexts is quite proud of his war-making activities, talking about war crimes. (?) And the accompanying fact that much-lower-paid Andrew Young, Edwards' aide, will be taking the fall if Edwards is found innocent, does not seem to bother Dungone.

Obviously, per Orwell, some men are more equal than others.

Me:

So, let me clarify:

You think that if I gave money to a campaign for a man to run for president, and this politician gives it to his mistress to shut her up and support her in high style, that is “daytime talk show crap”?

Dumbfounded. See, I call that stealing. I know some of the people he stole from.

Amazing.

I hardly know what to say.

....

Do you understand that he was STEALING? Millions of dollars? And trying to pin it on one of his underlings? In all your identifying with Mr Sexpot, what about his employee Andrew Young? Is he just not important enough to identify with?

Ain’t he a man, too?

Dungone, again FOR THE WIN:

I believe that keeping one’s sex life out of the media is a valid use of campaign funds. I believe that our country has gone down the shit-hole because underhanded fundamentalist scumbags keep dragging people’s sex lives out into the open to humiliate them and ruin their careers. If we can’t protect people’s sex lives from public scrutiny then we will never be able to have, let’s say, a president in an open relationship, perhaps even a single president who is dating. You won’t have a gay or a lesbian president, either. Only the most bland, cookie-cutter, dust-web-ridden “family values” liars can survive in our culture’s political climate, and I believe that this is a huge detriment to us all. So I believe that it’s fair use of campaign funds to keep sex lives private.

And I will leave that unbelievable, amoral reply right there, for all to read again and behold for themselves.

Men's Rights Advocate assures us: A politician (in this case, a very RICH politician with a large number of POOR contributors) informing you that your hard-earned campaign contributions will be used for advertising or whatever, and instead using it to pay his mistresses' bills, is perfectly fine. Since nobody (of course!) can be expected to behave morally and honestly, then laws should be changed to allow candidates to use funds to pay off their girlfriends and tell you lies about where your money goes. To do otherwise is to be against MEN and SEX.

And you will notice, I never did get an answer from Dungone about duped fall-guy Andrew Young. Hey, Young is small potatoes, the important thing is that Rich Sexy Senator Who Can't Keep It Zipped can do as he pleases, at taxpayer expense. (PS: why is this "sexist" of me to say? Women do not have zippers now? Huh?)

As soon as I develop any sympathies for the MRAs, I am put in my place by one of them; usually banned from their blogs and/or given some sex-obsessed, thoroughly-entitled, good-old-boy insanity like this as a substitute for logic. Then I remember why I was a feminist in the first place.

So no, I don't believe Edwards should be able to take my friends' money and give it to his girlfriend to live in a pricey mansion, especially since he is a millionaire and can afford to pay her rent himself. Call me old-fashioned.

And yes, my feminism is intact.

I usually need something like this to remind me of how important it is.

John Edwards indicted by federal grand jury

This just in! Former North Carolina Senator (and 2004 Vice Presidential candidate) John Edwards has been indicted for cooking the campaign books to support one Ms Rielle Hunter (see Enquirer cover, left). Not simply another report of hanky-panky from a politician, this indictment claims funds were illegally diverted from Edwards' presidential campaign to financially support (and silence) Hunter, the mother of his child.

From CBS:

RALEIGH, N.C. — A federal grand jury has indicted two-time presidential candidate John Edwards over money spent to cover up his extramarital affair during the height of his 2008 campaign for the White House.

The case of USA v. Johnny Reid Edwards contains six counts, including conspiracy, four counts of illegal campaign contributions and one count of false statements. The indictment was returned in the Middle District of North Carolina Friday.

An Edwards spokeswoman said she wasn't aware of the filing and declined immediate comment.

The indictment is the culmination of a federal investigation that lasted more than two years and scoured through virtually every corner of Edwards' political career.

Edwards' attorney Greg Craig met Friday with prosecutors in North Carolina, an indication that the former presidential candidate is likely to be charged, either in a grand jury indictment or in a negotiated charge to which he would plead guilty.

A person with knowledge of the investigation said Craig, a Washington lawyer who was President Barack Obama's first White House counsel, planned to be in his client's home state Friday, where prosecutors were prepared to file charges. The source insisted on anonymity in order to discuss the private negotiations.

Edwards has had North Carolina representation throughout the investigation, but Craig was brought onto the team earlier this year when the decision whether to charge him still rested with Justice Department officials in Washington.

Those officials have approved criminal charges; they decided that the hundreds of thousands of dollars that two Edwards donors gave to help keep his mistress, in hiding were contributions that should have been reported publicly by his campaign fund because they aided his bid for the Democratic White House nomination. Edwards' lawyers have argued that the funds were gifts from old friends intended to keep the affair a secret from his wife, Elizabeth, who died of cancer in December.

A plea to a felony charge involving campaign finances could strip Edwards of his law license and end any hope he could work as an attorney for the poor. And a trial would mean more sordid stories about his campaign affair and the child he fathered during it, further battering his reputation.

Even if he were to win the case, it appears the 2004 Democratic vice presidential nominee would do so by making a humiliating argument: that money used to keep his mistress and out-of-wedlock child in hiding was intended to shield the affair from his cancer-stricken wife — not to aid his candidacy, which is what prosecutors believe.

"Trial or not, John Edwards is the Charlie Sheen of American politics — great hair and no chance for rehabilitation," said Democratic consultant Jack Quinn.

Political sex scandals can either be just a career glitch (think Newt Gingrich, who recently announced a run for the presidency) or a career-ender (think Mark Foley, who recently declined a run for mayor of West Palm Beach, Fla.). Many Democrats believe Edwards falls into the latter category, as someone who faces little chance of revitalizing his image even if he emerges victorious from his legal case.

Edwards' attorneys have denounced the investigation as a waste of resources and contend he did not violate the law.

Edwards has said he hopes that once this case is behind him he can revive his legal career, specializing in helping the victims of poverty he championed on the campaign trail. However, a lawyer in North Carolina who pleads guilty or no contest to a criminal offense faces disciplinary action by the State Bar, ranging from a mild rebuke to a loss of license to practice.

The case against Edwards focused on the private money used to keep Edwards' mistress in hiding. Andrew Young, a former aide to Edwards, initially claimed paternity of mistress Rielle Hunter's child and traveled around the country keeping her in seclusion. Young has said he received hundreds of thousands of dollars of support from two wealthy Edwards donors.

Another dent in an Edwards' revival is moving ahead in civil court, where Young and Hunter are battling over a purported sex tape involving the former candidate. Edwards has been deposed as part of that lawsuit.

Gary Pearce, a Democratic strategist who helped get Edwards elected to the Senate, said he'd prefer to see Edwards take a plea deal and avoid a grueling trial that would rehash past sins.

"We've all had enough," said Pearce, who doesn't think Edwards will ever be able to return to politics.

I dunno about that... if Newt Gingrich can run for president as a moralist, anyone can.

Huckabee claims he could have won SC primary

Mike Huckabee, currently out pimping his "book" (read: presidential campaign preview) titled A Simple Government, told Greenville Online that he would have won the South Carolina Republican Primary in 2008, if not for a "deal" between candidates Fred Thompson and John McCain.

In the primary, McCain was the clear winner, with Huckabee placing second and Thompson third.

According to Greenville Online (apologies if link doesn't work, they always nab me by the end of the day!):

Huckabee, who may run for the White House again, said Thompson had planned to drop out of the presidential race following the New Hampshire primary, but McCain persuaded him to stay in — a move that split the conservative vote in South Carolina and helped deliver the election to McCain.

...

Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor, said Thompson spent most of his South Carolina campaign in Greenville and Spartanburg, a stronghold for Huckabee.

Thompson “didn’t have a significant vote, but he had just enough, and our polling showed that it was coming off of me,” Huckabee said. “And it kept me just a couple of points under McCain, and you know the rest is history. But that’s life.”

Huckabee said he doesn’t have any hard feelings “for the deal they made. I know they did it because I’ve had close aides to both of them who told me.”

Campaigns are about winning, so “it’s never been something that I was upset about because I would have done the same thing if I could have,” Huckabee said.

Dean Rice, Thompson’s national campaign manager in 2008, couldn’t be reached, nor could Trey Walker, McCain’s campaign manager in South Carolina that year who now works for Gov. Nikki Haley.

Interesting, indeed! If Huckabee had won South Carolina, he would have taken the lead.

McCain won the support of more than 33 percent of South Carolina Republicans in 2008 on his way to secure the party’s nomination.

Huckabee won every county along the Interstate 85 corridor except Oconee, but it wasn’t enough to overcome McCain’s advantage in the rest of the state. Huckabee claimed just under 30 percent of the vote statewide.

Thompson garnered 15.6 percent to take third and push former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney into fourth.

Presidential aspirants tend to pay special attention to South Carolina because of its first-in-the-South primary.

Other Republicans eyeing a White House run who have visited the Upstate in recent months include Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty.

U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, another potential Republican candidate, spoke in Spartanburg on Saturday.

This year, the Fox News Channel has agreed to televise two GOP presidential debates from South Carolina, the first set for the Peace Center in downtown Greenville on May 5.

And YES, friends and neighbors, I plan to be outside the Peace Center on Cinco De Mayo to welcome them in my own special way. (grins)

I have been chatting with the energetic youth at Suite 8 in Greenville, and some of them will be there also. We may actually have a REAL DEMONSTRATION AGAINST THE GOP DEBATE IN GREENVILLE! ((faints)) That's a bit optimistic here in DeMint country, but I just wanted you to know: talks are underway. We may require a permit. Also, I am quite familiar with the terrain of the Peace Center, and it will be ridiculously easy for them to cordon us off into various alleyways. But I am ON THE CASE, and wanted DEAD AIR denizens to know that!

In addition, DEAD AIR will be blogging the next SC primary and the next election to a bloody fare thee well. STAY TUNED, SPORTS FANS!

Odds and Sods - First for 2010 edition!

It's been awhile since I served up the links... and you all have my deepest and sincerest apologies for not sharing.

I've been somewhat overwhelmed lately, and have mostly taken refuge in goofiness like old movies and playing FarmVille, she admitted, embarrassed. Mr Daisy has offered the unsolicited opinion that FarmVille should feature floods and tornadoes and periodically wipe out our crops, just like in real life. He doesn't seem to understand that real life is what we are ESCAPING FROM. Yeesh!

Anyway, fasten your seat belts, sports fans, and get ready for some fun reads!

~*~

Big shocker: Sarah Palin has a gig on Fox News now! As SouthernFemaleLawyer humorously puts it, What a Non-Surprise:

While I obviously am not a Palin fan, I don’t think that anyone can deny that the idea of Palin has become almost metaphysical. And not just to her supporters. “Palin” now represents, in a strange way, the ultimate expression of democracy. The sticking point there being, of course, that we are not a democracy. But the idea that anyone (yes, even YOU) could control the shots, combined with the idea that anyone (yes, even YOU) can override the current party system and define the country, pretty much has resulted in Palin-the-Idea.

However you look at it, it is a pretty empowering concept, which is why I don’t think that there is anything Palin (the person) could do to damage Palin (the idea). And that applies to both a pro-Palin sentiment AND an anti-Palin sentiment. Because what the meta-Palin represents to me is the fact that the conservative use of a social pyramid scheme (‘we the powerful will convince the powerless masses to support us against their better interests by pretending that they could one day be us’) has gone terribly awry. And, given, history, it was only a matter of time.

SouthernFemaleLawyer is one of my new favorite pit-stops in Blogdonia; centered, logical and insightful, don't miss her blog! And her observations about Palin are right on the money.

~*~

Jessamyn Smyth always rocks my Facebook feed with some great stuff. This week, her contributions have been particularly noteworthy:

The Loss of Legibility, Or, Why Do People Still Pile Into Grad School?

Why do people still go to grad school in the liberal arts?

My generation had an excuse; we were told that a great wave of retirements was imminent, after which jobs would spring from the ground like mushrooms. In other words, we were lied to.

But the adjunct trend is so well-established at this point, and the economic irrationality of grad school so screamingly obvious, that it's fair to wonder why many departments are actually experiencing record applications.

Love and Death in Indiana is about the murder of Don Belton, gay assistant professor at Indiana University:

It is easy to speculate about what may have happened. In fact we do not know. But the circumstances track with a familiar pattern -- one common enough to have a name: “the ‘gay panic’ defense.” This rests on the idea that the wave of disgust created in a heterosexual person at exposure to gay sexuality can create a state of temporary psychosis. The panic-stricken victim loses responsibility for his (for some reason, it always turns out to be “his”) actions.

This is an idea that should be retired to the Museum of Deranged Rationalization as soon as possible. But it seems far-fetched to imagine that Griffin and his counsel will get through trial without invoking it. (Despite his confession, Griffin has pleaded not guilty to murder.)

On the other hand, the “panic” defense touches on an issue that was of vital interest to Belton himself. He wrote the introduction to a book edited by the late Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick. Her work on queer theory includes a sustained inquiry into the complicated and damaging way certain institutions have forged intense bonds among men while also obliging them to police one another for the slightest trace of homosexuality. This contradictory demand makes for paranoia and volatility.

An excellent, if very sombering, read.

DEAD AIR sends our deepest and most heartfelt sympathies to Don Belton's family, and novenas are currently ascending to heaven for his immortal soul.

~*~

Pat Robertson has once again opened his big, dumb mouth... this time about the tragedy in Haiti--undoubtedly you have heard this one already.

Robertson's "true story": Haiti "swore a pact to the devil" to get "free from the French" and "ever since, they have been cursed":

PAT ROBERTSON: And, you know, Kristi, something happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people might not want to talk about it. They were under the heel of the French. You know, Napoleon III and whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, "We will serve you if you will get us free from the French." True story. And so, the devil said, "OK, it's a deal."

See, remember back in the Middle Ages, when the Catholic Church wouldn't allow just anybody to freely pontificate (root word: pontiff) about the ways of God?

Well, that is the kinda thing they were worried would happen.

(sigh)

~*~

And speaking of Catholicism (giggle! simply could not resist that segue!), Figleaf offers the amusing post titled "Women's Sex Drives Lowered By Guilt?" Why Would it Cost Us $105,000 to Learn If Research Really Says That?. Research? They really need RESEARCH for that?!? (They could have paid ME $105,000 and I could have told them!)

~*~

I am #10 on the local library's list for the fabulously scandal-mongering GAME CHANGE... I am afraid I may have to break down and actually buy it before all the fuss is over! I promise, sports fans, I will review the book here if I ever get my grubby little hands on it.

Already, my feminist antennae are up, as the women in the narrative (Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Edwards, Sarah Palin) are getting the Lady Macbeth media-treatment. Those of you who saw 60 Minutes last Sunday know that Sarah Palin remarked that her choice as VP nominee was "God's will"... which is hardly the worst thing I can think of. (Is that supposed to be some big deal? Religious believers of all stripes regularly make this statement.) Much more alarming was the fact (later disputed by Palin, of course) that she didn't know why there was a North and South Korea. OMG.

Hillary is painted as crazy as a bedbug, and apparently, Elizabeth isn't far behind. The men (you know, the guys with the power) seem to fare much better. Hm.

As I said, my feminist antennae are up and I will certainly let you know.

~*~

AND FINALLY: Daisy (the Curly Cat) and Harley are being very, very good kitties and trying hard to find two disabled kitties a home! They must be adopted together because they help each other. Their names are Lenox and Diamond and you can read all about them HERE! They are located in South Florida, so if you can help at all in any way, please contact Your Daily Cute (see second link) or Animal Aid at LeeSparkman (at) aol (dot) com.

John Edwards: fessing up at last?

Left: John Edwards, photo from C-Span's Campaign Network.


As sports fans may recall, I have Edwards voters RIGHT IN MY OWN HOUSEHOLD! I strategically voted for Ron Paul in the South Carolina GOP primary, to take votes away from the mainstream GOP candidates and to try to move the Republican party leftward (on the war issue, particularly). Mr Daisy voted for John Edwards.

And so, as usual, I got hooted at for my strategic voting... that is, until this scandal broke. Not a single yap of criticism since! Hahahaha.

The conventional wisdom is that Edwards nearly destroyed the Democratic party. At the very least, a bullet was truly dodged. It's a huge relief he was not crowned the party's choice, as many southern Democrats believed he would be. I wrote here about how Edwards went from Ashley Wilkes to Barney Fife, one southern archetype to another, overnight!

Currently, waiting for the press conference, in which he will finally fess up, 18 months AFTER THE FACT.

And how will his daughter process the information, years from now, when she learns her daddy did not claim her until forced to, by some damn BOOK?

Asshole!

Sources: Edwards to admit paternity of ex-mistress' child

Raleigh, N.C. — Sources have told WRAL News that they expect former U.S. Sen. John Edwards to admit that he is the father of his former mistress' 18-month-old daughter.

Edwards, a two-time Democratic presidential candidate, confessed last August to having an affair with Rielle Hunter, who served as a videographer on Edwards' 2008 campaign. He has denied fathering her daughter, saying his relationship with Hunter ended before the child was conceived.

The name of the girl's father isn't disclosed on her birth certificate.

Andrew Young, a long-time Edwards aide, initially claimed to be the father of Hunter's child, but he is reportedly writing a book in which he will claim Edwards is the father.

A federal grand jury is investigating whether Edwards' campaign funds were illegally paid to Hunter to keep quiet about the affair.

What a sordid mess. I should have expected this from some lawyer-turned-Senator who got rich off poor people's misfortune, but I was busy thinking he looked good on TV and we therefore might be able to take back the White House. Who knew the country was ready for a black president?

Note: STILL NOT CONVINCED, particularly lately, that the country IS fully ready, but that's another blog post.

Happy Inauguration Day!

Lots of great stuff happening... unfortunately, I'll be working this evening and will miss the local MoveOn.org party, at Connolly's. (((waves at everyone there!))) I am glad to be home to watch it as it happens, though. You can't have everything!

I think I will find the mention of his middle name HUSSEIN, during the swearing-in, the most inspiring. If you need any more proof that this country has CHANGED, obviously, you didn't grow up with presidents with boring-ass names like Johnson and Ford.

Too thrilling for mere words. The Angry Black Woman and Vanessa of Plucky Punk, are both ON THE SCENE--check out their blogs!

~*~

Below: From Boing Boing, comes Obama as Bob Marley and St Martin de Porres.

Interestingly, the folks at Boing Boing (not well-versed in Catholic iconography) thought the image on the vigil candle was supposed to be Jesus. (The photo was taken in the Mission District of San Francisco.) In fact, St Martin de Porres was a Peruvian Dominican of mixed-racial heritage, the patron saint of the poor. I just realized this meant that the folks at Boing Boing didn't fully get the reference that was being made with that candle.

Madonna fans, of course, will remember St Martin's famous appearance in her controversial 1989 video, Like a Prayer.

~*~

And finally, it's time to throw our virtual shoes at the departing Dubya! Good riddance, and thanks for screwing everything up beyond belief!

This act is in solidarity with Iraqi shoe-thrower Muntader al-Zaidi, who made world-headlines throwing his shoe at George W. Bush.

Let us also throw our shoes today, with aplomb!

If you haven't thrown yours yet, there's still time!


~*~

I had my final X-ray yesterday, and I have moved up from the leg cast/boot in this photo, to a sort of corset-looking thing, that laces up around my ankle. At long last! So, I am finally FREE to THROW this cast at Bush. (Is that great timing or what?)

I throw this leg cast in solidarity with all the people not lucky enough to get a final X-ray, not lucky enough to get their broken and twisted bones healed by modern medicine. I throw this leg cast in hopes we will AT LAST HAVE A CIVILIZED MEDICAL SYSTEM IN THIS COUNTRY, that does not throw people out in the cold when they have no money. That does not look only at the bottom line, but attempts actual healing. That doesn't let Big fucking Pharm rule the roost! WE PRAY THAT THE PEOPLE WILL BE HEALED, AMEN.


What might our economy look like, if people weren't so bogged down with health-insurance concerns, that they (we!) are too afraid to change jobs? How can we start dynamic new businesses (like the capitalists are always burbling about) when we are worried that one simple illness could totally take us down? If we were free to actually move up, as the so-called American dream has promised? How many people stay in one awful job forever, when they have so much to contribute, all because they are afraid to lose usually-shitty health-insurance, that is indeed, still better than none at all? How many kids drag-out their time in college, since they know when they finally graduate, they probably won't have any health insurance on their entry-level job?

How many people with disabilities do not bother to find jobs, afraid they will lose the few benefits they have? (Some are having benefits cut constantly, as it is.)

THIS STATE OF AFFAIRS is disgusting... the fact that we are supposed to be THE GREAT WESTERN CIVILIZATION, and pronounce on the affairs of other nations, and still can't even take care of our own sick and disabled citizens? This is totally and completely fucked up, maybe the most fucked up thing about this country. As an alternative-medicine practitioner, I hear about it daily. It is stagnating us. We must change.

Amen.

As Bill O'Reilly would say, there's the memo.

And now, I log off and join the virtual festivities, as HOPE comes to our nation.

Again, Amen.

Sarah Palin becomes a grandma

Bristol and Tripp, AP photo.

~*~

My first thought: Please God, why can't they give these children some decent names?

Bristol Palin, the 18-year-old unmarried daughter of former Vice Presidential candidate/Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, has delivered her first child, Tripp Easton Mitchell Johnston, over the holidays. Interestingly, Bristol and her child's father, Levi Johnston, repeatedly promised to get married during the presidential campaign and still haven't.

Now, what's up with that? Inquiring minds want to know!

Bristol obediently delivered a statement, claiming teens need to "prevent pregnancy"--yet provides no details about how exactly one should do this. Birth control? Abstinence? Since she did neither, maybe she doesn't know.

“Teenagers need to prevent pregnancy to begin with,” the governor’s teenage daughter said in the statement dated Wednesday but posted Friday. “This isn’t ideal. But I’m fortunate to have a supportive family which is dealing with this together. Tripp is so perfectly precious; we love him with all our hearts. I can’t imagine life without him now.”

She added that she “obviously discourages” other teenage couples from getting pregnant, noting that her life has been forever altered.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Levi's mother, Sherry Johnston, was busted for trafficking Oxys:

Johnston's mother was arrested on felony drug charges this month after state troopers served a search warrant at her Wasilla home. According to authorities, she sent text messages to two police informants in which she discussed making drug transactions involving OxyContin, a strong prescription painkiller.

Alaska? Are these people really from ALASKA? (((winks))) Cultural lesson for today: Just remember, people from the south ain't the only ones that sound like stereotypical Jerry Springer show guests, okay?

And besides, people in the south are not usually named Trig, Track, Willow, Piper, Bristol and Tripp. But maybe I speak too soon...I fear a dangerous trend.

Dear God, those poor kids.

~*~

My piece on Palin's impending grandmotherhood, a perennial favorite I posted on Feministe.

Palin is "hardcore pro-life" by Jill at Feministe

The Sarah Palin Baby name generator!--which was obviously pretty useful for Bristol.

----------------
Listening to: The Strangeloves - Night Time
via FoxyTunes

Odds and Sods - Just an old sweet song edition...

The horrific Saxby Chambliss TV ads are running every 5 minutes in the Atlanta metro area. Over the holidays, thought I would end up slitting my wrists.

The Georgia Senatorial run-off election is tomorrow, which accounts for the wall-to-wall advertising:

Georgia voters head to the polls Tuesday to determine whether the Democratic dream of a filibuster-resistant Senate is still alive.

They’ll be voting in the closely watched Senate race between Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss and Democrat Jim Martin, which could give Democrats their 59th Senate seat. The Minnesota Senate race, between Republican Sen. Norm Coleman and Democrat Al Franken, has not yet been decided.

Chambliss won 49.8 percent of the vote to Martin’s 46.8 percent on Election Day, but he fell about 8,000 votes short of the majority needed to prevent a runoff.

Chambliss has framed the race as a firewall to prevent unchecked Democratic power, while Martin has closely associated himself with President-elect Barack Obama in hopes of rallying Democrats to the polls in an election that will hinge on which side can turn out its core supporters.

On Monday, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin became the latest high-wattage politician to campaign in Georgia as she traveled the state with Chambliss.

“The eyes of the nation are on you,” Palin told several thousand supporters at a rally in Augusta. “We all have Georgia on our mind.”

The current spate of TV commercials are MEAN, vicious, low-down, old-school dirty politics, wherein the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) claims Martin was "one of three to vote against making it a felony to solicit a child for prostitution," which isn't the truth (see link).

Remember, this is the same unprincipled, unethical politician who won by accusing his opponent, disabled veteran Max Cleland, of lacking patriotism, so I guess I shouldn't be so surprised. But the sheer spectacle is embarrassing and awful, as is the possibility that Chambliss could be re-elected.

*~*

National March for Sex Workers Rights! is
Dec. 17, 2008 in Washington DC!


Read more at Ren's (above link) or at Sex Workers Outreach Project.

Also, I'd like to give a shout-out to a sex-worker blog that is new to my blogroll, Star Light Ministries!

Welcome to Deadland, yall!

~*~

Let's hope HEROES won't get too maudlin with the disability theme tonight. For those who don't follow the series, Daphne, speedy female version of The Flash, amidst many twists and turns of the narrative, has morphed into someone who walks with crutches. Alas, she is pretty melodramatic about it, and I'm crossing my fingers mightily that this (intriguing) plot twist doesn't turn negative and cliche-ridden, although it threatens to already.

----------------
Listening to: Passions - I'm in Love With a German Film Star
via FoxyTunes

My priest advises penance for Obama vote

Father Jay Scott Newman

~*~


Possible secondary subtitle: What should Daisy do?

Italics in article below is mine.

Priest advises penance for Obama vote

Parishioners shouldn't take Communion until they do because of president-elect's abortion view, he says

By Ben Szobody • STAFF WRITER • November 13, 2008

The priest at St. Mary's Catholic Church in downtown Greenville has told parishioners that those who voted for Barack Obama placed themselves under divine judgment because of his stance on abortion and shouldn't receive Holy Communion until they've done penance.

The Rev. Jay Scott Newman told The Greenville News on Wednesday that church teaching doesn't allow him to refuse Holy Communion to anyone based on political choices, but that he'll continue to deliver the church's strong teaching on the "intrinsic and grave evil of abortion" as a hidden form of murder.

Both Obama and Joe Biden, the vice president-elect, support legal abortions. Obama has called it a "divisive issue" with a "moral dimension," and has pledged to make women's rights under Roe v. Wade a "priority" as president. He opposes a constitutional amendment overturning the Supreme Court decision.

At issue for the church locally and nationwide are exit polls showing 54 percent of self-described Catholics voted for Obama, as well as a growing rift in the lifestyle and voting patterns between practicing and non-practicing Catholics.

In a letter posted on St. Mary's Web site, Newman wrote that "voting for a pro-abortion politician when a plausible pro-life alternative exists constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil."

Catholics who did so should be reconciled to God through penance before receiving communion, "lest they eat and drink their own condemnation," Newman wrote, echoing a I Corinthians admonition for anyone who partakes "without recognizing the body of the Lord."

The response from parishioners has been supportive by a margin of 9 to 1, Newman said. He also cited Scripture in urging parishioners to pray for Obama and cooperate with him wherever conscience permits.

Bishops in Baltimore for their annual meeting this week are wrestling with how to explain church teaching on abortion in light of voters' choice of Obama, who is Protestant, and Biden, who is Catholic, according to The Associated Press.

Francis Cardinal George, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, told colleagues that "the common good can never be adequately incarnated in any society when those waiting to be born can be legally killed."

Bishops have more vocally spoken about abortion this election season, though the issue hasn't generated as much public debate as the decision in 2004 to deny then-presidential candidate John Kerry communion because of his abortion views.

Stephen Gajdosik, spokesman for the Catholic Diocese of Charleston, told The News that calling parishioners who voted for a candidate who supports legalized abortions to penance is a question of how best to deepen a flock's relationship to God and a move left up to local priests. He said such a move is appropriate and in line with church teaching.

In an e-mail interview, Newman cited a survey earlier this year by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life that showed fewer than 25 percent of the 65 million Americans who call themselves Catholic attend Mass each Sunday, a "disturbing fact of life" that he said shows the vast majority of those baptized into the church "do not live as disciples of Jesus Christ in any observable way."

Mass-attending Catholics, he said, "vote overwhelmingly" for candidates who oppose legalized abortion.

The Catholic dilemma coincides with a split in Protestant circles between those who consider abortion as a non-negotiable moral concern when voting, and emerging groups such as Sojourners who call for candidates to be evaluated on a "consistent ethic of life," abortion and the Iraq war included.

Newman calls abortion the "chief battleground" in the so-called culture wars, and different from "prudential" matters such as health care, education or the war on terror. A Catholic who gets an abortion, encourages one or assists in the procedure is automatically excommunicated from the church, Newman said, a penalty he said doesn't apply to other forms of killing.

"The reason is that abortion is usually murder in secret and it lays axe to human life at its root," he said. With nearly 50 million abortions since Roe v. Wade, Newman said Obama would seek to make "hidden murder" a legally protected right, and anyone who voted to give him such power "will be complicit in the legal holocaust which will follow."

Asked about the moral weight of abortion, Gajdosik said that if only three abortions per year took place in the United States, while an objectively immoral war took thousands of innocent lives, then the war might outweigh abortion as a moral concern.

As it is, he said, the weight of large numbers of innocents "slaughtered" should be the overwhelming issue of concern to Catholics.

Gajdosik said that for someone to be guilty of cooperating with evil, a person would have to know what's at stake and purposefully vote anyway for the candidate who supports legalized abortion.

Newman said, "An uninformed vote is an irresponsible vote," and that no informed voter this year could have mistaken the candidates' abortion positions.

No matter the intention of the voter, Newman said a vote for Obama is "material cooperation" with his goal of extending the use of lethal violence against unborn children.

Asked if he would actively deny the sacraments to Obama voters, Newman said he won't because the church teaches that no one is denied communion unless it would cause "grave scandal," such as in the case of a notorious public sinner.

However, he said he'll continue to teach the necessity of being in "full, visible communion" with the church before receiving the sacraments.

Yes, this directly affects me this time. This is my church, although my attendance is scattershot and I also go to Masses at various other parishes in the upstate. St Mary's is the oldest parish in the region and fairly stunning. (The beautiful stained glass art I have featured on my blog, is all from St Mary's.)

St Mary's members are pretty affluent and old-south. After years of attempting to fit in socially, I simply gave up and moved on, for the most part.

South Carolina is a death penalty state, as I have written before many times, and in the past, I organized prayer vigils for prisoners condemned to death. In fairness, Father Newman graciously allowed me use of the church and church facilities for these events, but notably did not himself attend.

I have to ask: Why doesn't this abortion-logic apply to other issues? Anyone who voted for 100 more years of war, as well as the continuance of capital punishment and the denial of universal health care (leads to DEATH, you know), should also confess and ask for penance, in my ever-humble opinion.

And failing that, why can't we simply call it a wash? Why is abortion the sole litmus test?

If I were as plucky as I once was, I'd make a point of attending daily Mass at St Mary's, but alas, Father Newman CANCELED daily Noon* Masses a couple of years ago. This made it impossible for many of us who work on weekends to attend at all. As it is now, my health issues have basically confined me to my home for a few more weeks anyway.

My last physically-demanding task was standing in line for an hour and a half to vote.

***

*EDITED TO ADD: As Anonymous pointed out to me, St Mary's offers very early (7am) daily Masses. I referred to the 12 Noon daily Mass being canceled, and was not specific. My deepest apologies. I am dimly aware of Masses at such ungodly hours, but mostly, have only heard of them by legend and yes, in the church bulletin. (((shame))) Sorry, I did not actually check the website before linking.

On Proposition 8, the Mormons, and more...

The Mormons were successfully forced into accepting the government's domestic rules for their religion. I have always thought this was wrong. If they wanted polygamy, that was their business. I find it shameful that a government founded on the separation of Church and State, would actively interfere with the establishment of (any) church belief.

Isn't it ironic that a US president who was himself likely gay, James Buchanan, is the one who sent the army into the Utah Territory (known to Mormons as "the State of Deseret") in 1857. At this time in history, polygamy was an important matter of doctrine in the Church of Latter Day Saints:

The doctrine of the church basically believed that there were countless number of souls waiting to begin an earthly life. The human soul was united with the body at birth which grew and matured, and eventually created new families which led to more births and more souls beginning an earthly existence. Procreation was therefore a very important part of the Mormon religious doctrine because spiritual souls could be granted earthly bodies. Polygamy or the system of “plural marriages” first appeared in the church in 1841 and by 1870 there were an increasing number of plural marriage families in the Utah Territory.

And after federal intervention, Utah was under the heel of Uncle Sam, much like the Native Americans in that same area of the country. By 1890, the Mormons got with the program and renounced polygamy as LDS doctrine. (Of course, as we know, some people never did.)

Thus, the Mormons have now morphed into the oppressor, and seek to bring the power of the government into other people's domestic choices. Apparently, they were the primary financial sponsors behind California's PROPOSITION 8, which passed.

They didn't learn. (((sigh)))

Actually, some did.

Prop 8: California gay marriage fight divides LDS faithful

The church's effort against gay marriage is its most vigorous since 1970s
By Peggy Fletcher Stack
The Salt Lake Tribune
10/26/08

The thought of going to church in her southern California LDS ward makes Carol Oldham cry. She can't face one more sermon against same-sex marriage. She can't tolerate the glares at the rainbow pin on her lapel.

Oldham, a lifelong Mormon, is troubled by her church's zeal in supporting a California ballot initiative that would define marriage as between one man and one woman. She feels the church is bringing politics into her sanctuary.

It has tainted everything for me," Oldham said, choking up during a telephone interview. "I am afraid to go there and hear people say mean things about gay people. I am in mourning. I don't know how long I can last."

The LDS Church's campaign to pass Proposition 8 represents its most vigorous and widespread political involvement since the late 1970s, when it helped defeat the Equal Rights Amendment. It even departs from earlier efforts on behalf of traditional marriage, in which members felt more free to decide their level of involvement.

This time, LDS leaders have tapped every resource, including the church's built-in phone trees, e-mail lists and members' willingness to volunteer and donate money. Many California members consider it a directive from God and have pressured others to participate. Some leaders and members see it as a test of faith and loyalty.

Those who disagree with the campaign say they feel unwelcome in wards that have divided along political lines. Some are avoiding services until after the election; others have reluctantly resigned. Even some who favor the ballot measure are troubled by their church's zeal in the matter.

"I do expect the church to face a high cost - both externally and internally - for its prominent part in the campaign," said LDS sociologist and Proposition 8 supporter Armand Mauss of Irvine, Calif. He believes church leaders feel a "prophetic imperative" to speak out against gay marriage.

"The internal cost will consist of ruptured relationships between and among LDS members of opposing positions, sometimes by friends of long standing and equally strong records of church activity," Mauss said. "In some cases, it will result in disaffection and disaffiliation from the church because of the ways in which their dissent has been handled by local leaders."

Robert Rees, a former LDS bishop in California, says he has not witnessed this much divisiveness in the church over a political issue in the last 50 years.

Whatever the vote's outcome, Rees says, "it will take considerable humility, charity and forgiveness to heal the wounds caused by this initiative."

Talk about prophecy! Now that the Proposition has passed, outlawing gay marriage, the heat is ON.

Prop. 8 Protests Head To Salt Lake City
Demonstrations Planned At Mormon Headquarters Over Church's Funding Of Gay Marriage Ban

(CBS/ AP) A group of protesters plans to rally in front of the headquarters of the Mormon church over the faith's support for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in California.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints encouraged its members to work to pass Proposition 8 by volunteering their time and money for the campaign. California voters approved the measure Tuesday.

The Friday evening protest comes a day after people demonstrated outside a Mormon temple in Los Angeles. About 1,000 gay-marriage supporters waved signs and brought afternoon traffic to a halt.

On Thursday, outside the gates of a Mormon temple his father helped build, Kai Cross joined more than 2,000 gay-rights advocates in a chorus of criticism of the church's role in the likely passage of a statewide ban on same-sex marriage.

Once a devout Mormon who graduated from Brigham Young University, the 41-year-old Cross was disowned by his family and his church after he was outed as a gay man in 2001.

"They are on the losing side of history," Cross said Thursday of the church's opposition to gay marriage. Cross and other protesters blame leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for encouraging Mormons to funnel millions of dollars into television ads and mailings in favor of Proposition 8.

The ballot measure was sponsored by a coalition of religious and social conservative groups, would amend the California Constitution to define marriage as a heterosexual act. It would override a state Supreme Court ruling that briefly gave same-sex couples the right to wed.

According to the CBS News Election and Survey unit’s analysis, black voters overwhelmingly voted in favor of Prop. 8 - by a 70 percent to 30 percent margin. Hispanic voters overall favored the measure as well but only by a 53 percent to 47 percent margin. White voters were slightly on the side of approving it, 51 percent to 49 percent.

There is disappointment that the African-American community, which just saw the election of the first black president, voted overwhelmingly against same-sex marriage, reports CBS Early Show correspondent Hattie Kauffman.

The protest came amid questions about whether attempts to overturn the prohibition can succeed and whether the 18,000 same-sex marriages performed in California over the past four months are in any danger.

For Cody Krebs, 27, four months was not enough time to fulfill his "intense hope" to marry one day; he and his boyfriend have been together for little more than a year, so they aren't ready to wed.

On Thursday, Krebs dodged eggs hurled at protesters from an apartment building. He said he'd seen worse growing up in Salt Lake City.

"It's important to come out like this because it gets the gay community into the public eye," Krebs said. "I feel like this has started a lot of conversations that had to get started."

The demonstration began outside the temple in the Westwood section of Los Angeles and noisily spilled through the western side of the city, with chants of "Separate church and state" and "What do we want? Equal rights." Some protesters waved signs saying "No on H8" or "I didn't vote against your marriage," and many equated the issue with the civil rights struggle.

Two people were arrested after a confrontation between the crowd and an occupant of a pickup truck that had a banner supporting Proposition 8. One demonstrator ended up with a bloody nose in the fracas. Seven arrests occurred during Los Angeles-area street marches late Wednesday.

The temple protest was organized by the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center. Its chief executive, Lorri Jean, announced a Web-based effort dubbed InvalidateProp8.org to raise money to fight the constitutional amendment.

Gay-marriage proponents filed three court challenges Wednesday against the ban. The lawsuits raise a rare legal argument: that the ballot measure was actually a dramatic revision of the California Constitution rather than a simple amendment. A constitutional revision must first pass the Legislature before going to the voters.

Andrew Pugno, attorney for the groups that sponsored the amendment, called the lawsuits "frivolous and regrettable."

"It is time that the opponents of traditional marriage respect the voters' decision," he said.

The high court has not said when it will act. State officials said the ban on gay marriage took effect the morning after the election.

"We don't consider it a `Hail Mary' at all," said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. "You simply can't so something like this - take away a fundamental right at the ballot."

With many gay newlyweds worried about what the amendment does to their vows, California Attorney General Jerry Brown said he believes those marriages are still valid. But he is also preparing to defend that position in court.

The amendment does not explicitly say whether it applies to those already married. Legal experts said unless there is explicit language, laws are not normally applied retroactively.

"Otherwise a Pandora's Box of chaos is opened," said Stanford University law school professor Jane Schacter. Still, Schacter cautioned that the question of retroactivity "is not a slam dunk."

An employer, for instance, could deny medical benefits to an employee's same-sex spouse. The worker could then sue the employer, giving rise to a case that could determine the validity of the 18,000 marriages.

Supporters of the ban said they will not seek to invalidate the marriages already performed and will leave any legal challenges to others.

A 2003 California law already gives gays registered as domestic partners nearly all the state rights and responsibilities of married couples when it comes to such things as taxes, estate planning and medical decisions. That law is still in effect.

Regarding the statement that "a majority of blacks voted for Prop 8"--that particular proclamation isn't going over too well in various parts of Blogdonia.

For more on that, and other excellent fulminating on the topic, please check out:

Prop 8: The Rush to blame the Brown People (excellent collection of links at Alas, a blog)

Mark Oshiro: Protesting Proposition 8, Now You Need Your Allies (Womanist Musings)

Okay, the "Black people cost gay people the right to marry in CA ZOMG" meme needs to stop, NOW. (Fetch Me My Axe)

And Rick Warren is being singled out for ire, at long last! Yes, demonstrations in front of Saddleback Church! (CBS News account)

And on the subject of generalized sexual hysteria and Victorian bullshit, Proposition K in San Francisco also failed. Lea Brown described the measure in the SF Bay Guardian:

Prop. K would allow sex workers to organize for their rights and safety. It would enable them to report abuse in the industry without fear of prosecution. It would improve their chances of maintaining their health by lessening the stigma that prevents many from seeking the health care services they need. And it would do all this while still allowing law enforcement officials to investigate and prosecute human traffickers.

My favorite sex-worker blogger, Renegade Evolution, shares her strong feelings about Prop K's failure. (And as usual, a very lively comments section!)

And along these lines, don't forget to have a peep at the 11th Feminist Carnival for Sexual Freedom and Autonomy!

EDITED TO ADD: Join the Impact - Protest Prop 8 on November 15th. Thanks to The Jaded Hippy for the link.

The Palin Papers

No, doesn't have the same ring as "The Pentagon Papers"--but far more dishy!

From NEWSWEEK:

NEWSWEEK has also learned that Palin's shopping spree at high-end department stores was more extensive than previously reported. While publicly supporting Palin, McCain's top advisers privately fumed at what they regarded as her outrageous profligacy. One senior aide said that Nicolle Wallace had told Palin to buy three suits for the convention and hire a stylist. But instead, the vice presidential nominee began buying for herself and her family—clothes and accessories from top stores such as Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus. According to two knowledgeable sources, a vast majority of the clothes were bought by a wealthy donor, who was shocked when he got the bill. Palin also used low-level staffers to buy some of the clothes on their credit cards. The McCain campaign found out last week when the aides sought reimbursement. One aide estimated that she spent "tens of thousands" more than the reported $150,000, and that $20,000 to $40,000 went to buy clothes for her husband. Some articles of clothing have apparently been lost. An angry aide characterized the shopping spree as "Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast," and said the truth will eventually come out when the Republican Party audits its books.

You may also have heard that Palin didn't know Africa was a continent. This was initially reported by Carl Cameron of FOX NEWS, so not exactly a liberal smear.

From Huffington Post:

[One] of the most astounding and previously unknown tidbits about Sarah Palin has to do with her already dubious grasp of geography. According to Fox News Chief Political Correspondent Carl Cameron, there was great concern within the McCain campaign that Palin lacked "a degree of knowledgeability necessary to be a running mate, a vice president, a heartbeat away from the presidency," in part because she didn't know which countries were in NAFTA, and she "didn't understand that Africa was a continent, rather than a series, a country just in itself."

Palin was apparently a nightmare for her campaign staff to deal with. She refused preparation help for her interview with Katie Couric and then blamed her staff, specifically Nicole Wallace, when the interview was panned as a disaster. After the Couric interview, Fox News reported, Palin turned nasty with her staff and began to accuse them of mishandling her. Palin would view press clippings of herself in the morning and throw "tantrums" over the negative coverage. There were times when she would be so nasty and angry that her staff was reduced to tears.

When I wrote my nasty piece on Palin, this was definitely the vibe I was getting... In my working lifetime, I have been screamed at by several stupid conservative female supervisors, who put me in mind of Palin. My intuition told me she was one of these. I assume she is now being outed as an idiot by various pissed-off underlings who graciously covered for her ignorance and profligacy, only to be screamed at, instead of thanked. (Ah, if only we ALL could get even with nasty bosses!)

The entire Fox News report:



And she was ALMOST only a heartbeat away!