Posts Tagged ‘Palin derangement syndrome’

…then you are really doing well.

Congratulations Charles you’ve managed to get your slanderous attack on Robert Stacy McCain actually repeated in a Newspaper in Charleston West Va.

Now Don Surber writes for a paper in the same city (Charleston daily mail) so far be it from me to deride the state but I suspect that this was based on the clip from Rachel Maddow via LGF now that’s sourcing for you!

So to try to score a cheap shot against Sarah Palin they have committed an actionable offense. Once they repeated that claim in print and online it became so. And since the paper is on the net so if it’s picked up by a paper or a blogger in the UK. Robert Stacy and co might even choose to sue under British Libel laws.

Robert Stacy has already taken the first step demanding a retraction:

Over the years, this malicious campaign against my reputation has metastasized spectacularly on the Internet, as individuals and organizations with various political or personal motives have elaborated and repeated them. Some of the original sources for these accusations (e.g., a column by Michelangelo Signorile) contained factual errors, which have been incorporated into the urban-legend mythology, producing a Gordian Knot of non-fact that is not worth the effort it would take to unravel it. Like ancient Alexander, however, I am prepared to swing the sword. Retract, please.

These charges have, as I say, taken on an Internet life of their own. However, never before have they been published in a print newspaper. Whatever malice against the former governor of Alaska inspired your publisher, editors and writers to undertake this false and dishonorable guilt-by-association smear, it was a most foolish blunder. Retract, please.

Congratulations Charles you now have a chance to make Robert Stacy a fair amount of change and to have your charges refuted in a court of law and it will likely not cost you a cent. Then again if he is already going to court one more person in the doc won’t make a difference will it? You will make a real great witness at the trial. I suggest deleting those Archives asap.

…two subjects first Afghanistan:

The 9/11 attacks were planned in Afghanistan, and if we are not successful there, al Qaeda will once again find a safe haven, the Taliban will impose its cruelty on the Afghan people, and Pakistan will be less stable.

Our allies and our adversaries are watching to see if we have the staying power to protect our interests in Afghanistan. I recently joined a group of Americans in urging President Obama to devote the resources necessary in Afghanistan and pledged to support him if he made the right decision. Now is not the time for cold feet, second thoughts, or indecision — it is the time to act as commander-in-chief and approve the troops so clearly needed in Afghanistan.

This is a question of saying bluntly what needs to be said, but she said it on FACEBOOK so of course on Morning Joe they are snarking over it. After all don’t we all know that only a Wuss would be afraid of Al Qaeda.

Then on energy and the dollar:

The British newspaper The Independent reported today that Gulf oil producers were negotiating with Russia, China, Japan and France to replace the dollar in pricing oil with a basket of currencies. According to the Wall Street Journal, Arab oil officials have denied the story, but even the possibility of such a talk weakens the dollar and renews fears about its continued viability as an international reserve currency. In fact, today a United Nations official called for a new global reserve currency to replace the dollar and end our “privilege” to run up huge deficits. We can see the effect of this in the price of gold, which hit a record high today in response to fears about the weakened dollar.

All of this is a result of our out-of-control debt. This is why we need to rein in spending, and this is also why we need energy independence. A weakened dollar means higher commodity prices. This will make it more difficult to pay our bills – including the bill to import oil.

These are basic truths she bottom lines it:

Though the chant of “Drill, baby, drill” was much derided, it expressed the need to confront this issue head-on before it reaches a crisis point.

This is all about saying out-loud what people don’t want to say and the media want to ignore.

Update: Some in Headline comments disagree but I think the wisdom of the facebook strategy is self evident, no media filter and instant access by millions of subscribers who will see what she actually says before the MSM can play with it.

When you lose Day by Day:

Chris Muir chooses sides

The question is will Robert Stacy feel the need to repudiate this strip over his Rule 5 opinion of Maddow?

It’s interesting to note that he doesn’t even give Charles the satisfaction of a reference that could give him traffic.

Update: This is proof that being first doesn’t guarantee that elusive instalance.

On Sept 30th I wrote this:

I personally would be shocked if MSNBC doesn’t pick this up sometime before the week is out.

5 days later we see Rachel Maddow using it without mentioning Robert Stacy by name on Meet the Press. Clever move too, by being ambiguous it allows the accusation to dangle there against Palin and her co-author and doesn’t require any of the people present to confirm her opinion on Robert Stacy she states it as a fact and instead of people having to say it’s BS they talk about “association” as if the charge was true.

Now because it was on Meet the Press it gives MSNBC an excuse to cover it and assures Charles of some screen time.

What a bunch of dishonorable people.

Update: If it only takes place online does it count as a Lesbian Rule 5 Catfight?