What’s In Her Uterus?

Some professors apparently are not underpaid:

NEWPORT, KY (September X, 2011) – A journalism professor at Northern Kentucky University has posted a flier on the Internet offering a $10,000 reward to anybody who can provide verifiable and irrefutable proof that Sarah Palin is the birth mother of Trig, the boy she claims she delivered on April 18, 2008. . . Brad Scharlott, an associate professor of journalism, has read rumors online for years, and is now offering the $10,000 reward because he wishes to find the truth about the controversy. 

“The circumstantial evidence that Sarah Palin pulled off a pregnancy hoax, possibly to enhance her political standing, seems overwhelming,” Scharlott said, but added that he is still open to the possibility that Palin did give birth to Trig, and would gladly give the reward money to anyone who provides proof. 

The most hilarious thing about all this is that this effort is being loudly applauded by a group of pseudo-Liberals who were extremely appalled by the Obama’s birth certificate debacle. (Just do a search for “Obama’s birth certificate” on the website I just linked to and you’ll see.)

A fascination with strangers’ uteri is the only truly bipartisan sentiment many people share.

33 thoughts on “What’s In Her Uterus?”

  1. Ugh!
    You would think that the fact that a baby with down syndrome is astronomically more likely to be born to a woman who is in her 40s/50s than a teenage girl (the odds are 1 in 25 versus 1 in 1250 respectively if I recall) would slow these losers down, but no, apparently not.

    Like

    1. Believe it or not, they found an explanation for that. In their warped version of events, the child doesn’t have DS. He has fetal alcohol syndrome. They’ll fund an explanation for everything in their weird fixation on this woman’s reproductive system.

      Like

      1. Are you kidding me?
        I am so very far from Sarah Palin’s number one fan, but this is disgraceful, not only because of the hateful sexist fixation on her body, but also the cruel disregard for the child’s privacy and dignity, things which disabled people already have trouble maintaining in a disablist society.
        It reminds me of when I was growing up in Hawaii, and Democrats tried to discredit a conservative woman who was running for governor by spreading rumours that she was a lesbian and that she would cancel Christmas as an official holiday if elected (She was Jewish)
        Someone needs to write a book explaining this form of right-wing exceptionalism among liberals, the idea that it’s okay to make sexist remarks about a woman politician if she’s conservative.

        Like

        1. There is also a weird fixation on Bristol Palin among these people. They have been screeching for months about her supposed weight gain. Say, you dislike Sarah Palin’s policies. But how do you justify to yourself dissecting her daughter’s weight as any kind of political activism? This is so disgraceful.

          I can see absolutely no difference between this type of Liberals and the happy followers of Rush Limbaugh. They are all sexist jerks.

          Like

          1. In my opinion, a politician’s family should always be off-limits to political commentary, particularly children. I do think that it is unfair to the children for politicians to bring them on the campaign trail and deprive them of a normal childhood, but it is much more repugnant for pundits to use their presence as a justification for attacking them, everything from this ridiculous conspiracy to nasty remarks about Malia Obama’s hair is tasteless.

            Like

            1. I’d say husbands and wives should also be left in peace. Of course, their political activism should be discussed. But their weight and clothing choices? I can’t stand to hear any more about everything that is supposed to be wrong with Michelle Obama’s arms.

              Like

  2. Gross!

    Even allowing for the obsessive levels of hate Sarah Palin seems to draw, I still can’t fathom the obsession with proving she’s not Trig’s real mother. Why would anyone care about THAT? As opposed to, like, obsessing about her record as governor of Alaska or something. Something that’s relevant to people who aren’t her.

    Like

  3. I know! Anyone who cares who the biological mother of Trig is really needs to reexamine their priorities. Don’t like Palin? There’s plenty to criticize in her policies without resorting to this. It’s none of anyone’s business. And it’s sexist.

    Like

  4. I gots $10,000 sez when Anne Hathaway was just starting out a z-list producer got her hooked on crystal. So this one time she wasn’t getting any parts, I mean she was waiting to hear back on “Rachel Getting Married” but callbacks were like a week away and in the meantime she’d been evicted and was broke and all she could think about was that icy blue high, so she hit a guy with a hunk of concrete and took his wallet. Only turns out she hit him too hard and killed the poor son of a bitch. Hathaway had to wrap the guy in a big trash back and drag him down to the Santa Monica freeway where she dumped him under a bridge. Long story short she got the “Rachel” part and Jonathan Demme helped her clean it all up and get clean but do I have any takers?

    Like

  5. I’d like to point out that she’s running on her biography: her whole story is how she’s a living example of a Good Christian Woman raising a Good Christian Family. Part of that story is how she chose to give birth to a boy with Down’s Syndrome, which all the “Leftie Sluts” would have aborted on reflex. So if someone proves she’s lying about Trig’s origins, whether she adopted him as a political stunt or he’s actually Bristol’s- or her husband’s son- a lot of her credibility goes down the drain. (Words all deliberately chosen for satire.)
    Frankly, she’s the one who dragged her family into the spotlight, unlike Obama, who sought some degree of privacy for his family. Sexist? Maybe, but she should have kept them offstage if she wanted to have a level playing field. And ya know, if she wanted to be part of the panty-sniffing fetus loving Republican crowd, she should’ve expected some panty-sniffin’ in return.

    Like

    1. ‘I’d like to point out that she’s running on her biography”

      – She isn’t running anywhere.

      ‘which all the “Leftie Sluts” would have aborted on reflex.”

      -These are your projections. I dislike Palin passionately but she never said anything like this. YOU did.

      “Sexist? Maybe, but she should have kept them offstage if she wanted to have a level playing field”

      -What do you mean “maybe”? It is sexist. When is the last time anybody has been investigating a politician’s fatherhood? Mind you, about 10% of men are unwittingly raising somebody else’s child. And it’s a woman’s parenthood that gets questioned? And that’s “maybe” sexist?

      ‘And ya know, if she wanted to be part of the panty-sniffing fetus loving Republican crowd”

      -Are you hearing yourself? What’s with the weird tone? Is your only objection to the Republicans the kind that can be worded in these terms? Then I’m not surprised they won the Congress back last year. If this is the only alternative, then who’s surprised?

      Like

      1. Just yesterday, someone on a thread on my Facebook newsfeed, after ordering someone posting conservative views to leave the discussion and that no one there wanted to talk to his ilk, proceeded to refer to Palin as a “white trash barbie doll”. Nice. Really taking the higher ground there!

        And this should go without saying, but Christianity admits the existence of “sin” in everyone. So her family is not perfect? How is that evidence of anything? She has indeed been on the receiving end of non-stop, cringe-inducing sexism and classicism from liberal snobs.

        Like

        1. While Palin ran for Vice-PResident, I was completely against her because I find her political views unacceptable. Now, however, she isn’t running. She is a media personality, and in this capacity, I rather admire her. Now that she isn’t in office or running for one, everybody who writes this kind of garbage about her has revealed themselves as nothing but a sexist.

          I’m appalled that so-called Liberals don’t even see how they are guilty of the very thing they so often condemn in Conservatives.

          Like

          1. I would agree and add that it was true even when she was running. I forgot to add racist – really, white trash? redneck? from “progressives”? Can we not criticize someone without referring to their race, class or rural background, and female personae? Meanwhile, after eight years of Bush, referring to Obama with relief as intellectual or articulate was denounced as the worst form of racism.

            Yes, she was clearly uninformed and the idea of her being vice president was alarming for plenty of reasons, including her pro-life views. But to say she was a light-weight, and airhead, the anti-feminist…really? She is a woman from a modest, religious background who become a Governor of a state, and an active, big-game hunter, all while having a successful marriage and raising five kids (not to mention still looking fantastic after achieving all that!).

            Like

            1. ‘I would agree and add that it was true even when she was running. ”

              -Oh yes, it definitely was. But it was harder to call people out on doing because they could hide behind their political outrage. Now, all political activity from Palin is gone, but they are as vicious as ever. Quod erat demostrandum.

              Like

          2. I’m appalled too and that is why I’m so turned off by so-called Liberals. Really the venom and hatred directed towards her is off the charts, and yes sexist. I find it offensive and repulsive and it only serves to drive people away. It certainly has me.

            Like

    2. She dragged her family into the spotlight? How do you know she didn’t try to seek some privacy for her family? Why compare her to Obama when it comes to privacy. How would you know. The fact is women have always been held to a much different standard than men when it comes to people snooping into their private lives and their reproductive status. Some women are vilified if they do not have a family or children. Do some research. In addition to that, it’s not as if she’s the first politician to have her family around supporting her. I can only imagine that you are a male–I can’t think of other women who would say something like that as it demonstrates a lot of convenient naivete on your part.

      So she’s running on her biography so to speak…well isn’t Obama doing the same. How insulting, vile and low to suggest that she is lying about his origins. I can’t imagine anyone really believing that she would adopt him as a political stunt.

      “Even allowing for the obsessive levels of hate Sarah Palin seems to draw, I still can’t fathom the obsession with proving she’s not Trig’s real mother. Why would anyone care about THAT? As opposed to, like, obsessing about her record as governor of Alaska or something.”

      Precisely!

      Like

  6. Clarissa: I was using ‘Leftie Sluts sarcastically. She isn’t running- currently, but that could change at any second, and she’s still the Tea Party spokeswomen. If she goes down, most of the Tea Party goes with her.
    I do object to the Republicans- and the panty sniffers (read: most of the anti-choice crowd) are only part of the reason I dislike them. My point, which I think I didn’t get across, is that if the Republicans are going to politicize motherhood and family life, they should expect to have their families investigated and if there’s something rotten in their closets, it should be dragged into the light.
    Isabel: There are male airheads too, so I fail to see how condemning someone as an airhead is sexist. And, well- she is. Why should a statement of fact be considered offensive. Also, ‘white trash” is not a racist insult.

    Like

    1. “Also, ‘white trash” is not a racist insult.”

      Nothing offensive at all in referring to particular groups of people, based largely on their race and socioeconomic class, as garbage.

      Yeah, it’s not nearly as offensive or racist as saying a particular black man is intelligent and articulate.

      “they should expect to have their families investigated and if there’s something rotten in their closets, it should be dragged into the light.”

      Yep, you sound like a real, enlightened progressive.

      Like

      1. The snobbery that goes into calling somebody “white trash” is intolerable. All of a sudden only blue-blooded aristocrats are valid human beings, or what?

        I agree that this is unacceptable.

        Like

  7. I don’t think ‘white trash’ is racist, because I’ve only ever heard white people using that expression. Classist, yep.

    Like

    1. It’s racist, despite who you have heard it from and just because you say you’ve only ever heard it from white people–that is a convenient rationalization and doesn’t make it appropriate nor racist. It is unacceptable and offensive.

      Like

  8. Anonymous: She talked about her family all the time. She announced Bristol’s engagement the same day she was nominated, and drew attention to the fact that Bristol was ‘choosing life.” She dragged her kids around the country with her. Obama’s girls mostly attended campaign events that were in Chicago, and were very rarely visible at all. Palin always had at least one child and Trig with her. I can understand not leaving the baby behind, but the youngest two should’ve stayed in school.

    Also, saying ‘white trash is racist even when used by white people’ is like condemning an African American as racist for using the ‘N’ word to refer to his friends or people in his community or using
    the word ‘cracker’ while referring to a white person. People are not racist against members of their own race.

    Like

    1. The term is racist because it is rooted in a slave-owning culture. You can’t use a term and have no regard for its history, which in this case is very loaded. By using it, you confirm the old racist stereotypes that a “good” white person is only the slave-owning one.

      Like

    2. Political

      “She talked about her family all the time.”

      And if she didn’t talk about her family then she would have been vilified as a cold career woman or a family-hating shrew! Choosing career over family. She’s fucked either way. No matter what women do they will always be targets–it’s a perpetual “damned if you do” and “damned if you don’t” situation that males do not have to contend with. It’s sexist and you know it.

      ” She announced Bristol’s engagement the same day she was nominated, and drew attention to the fact that Bristol was ‘choosing life.”

      Could it be possible that she was happy about Bristol’s engagement and that it wasn’t quite the political posturing that you make it out to be–at least the engagement part. Had she not brought it up, she would have surely be made out to be ashamed. The “choosing life bit” is political and that is how she believes.

      “Palin always had at least one child and Trig with her. I can understand not leaving the baby behind, but the youngest two should’ve stayed in school.”

      I guess I didn’t pay that much attention to these details. Maybe she was advised to bring them along given that she is a woman and voters tend to look at women much differently and hold women to a much different standard than men. I’m not a follower, but what I do see is clearly sexist and that is the point I’m making.

      Like

  9. For god’s sake, the people to whom that term is applied to are the ones who want to bring slavery BACK. Most people use it completely independently of it’s roots- and yes, it would have arisen even if slavery wasn’t a factor. I don’t use it myself, but I find it very ridiculous that you’re trying to defend it.
    I personally don’t care what color a person is; if they have something worth saying, then I’ll listen to them, but people like Palin aren’t people I feel inclined to waste time on, other than to cackle gleefully when they self-destruct.
    And for the record: slavery is wrong. I would think very badly of anyone who I found out owned a slave or had ancestors who owned slaves. Heck, I wouldn’t visit the South because the soil is completely tainted.

    Like

    1. “but people like Palin aren’t people I feel inclined to waste time on”

      -Nobody is arguing. Far be it from me to invite anybody to listen to Palin. I have published a number of very harsh criticisms of her when she still was in office. Now that she isn’t, though, I don’t want to waste time on her personal life or anything of the kind.

      “For god’s sake, the people to whom that term is applied to are the ones who want to bring slavery BACK.”

      -This is a gross exaggeration.

      Like

    2. “For god’s sake, the people to whom that term is applied to are the ones who want to bring slavery BACK.”

      Who is that? Yes, I agree that is a gross exaggeration!

      “And for the record: slavery is wrong. I would think very badly of anyone who I found out owned a slave or had ancestors who owned slaves.”

      Really? So in other words you’re prone to holding personal grudges for centuries. Wow! You would actually judge someone today and hold them accountable for choices they didn’t make and actions they didn’t commit all based on what their blood relations may or may not have done many, many generations ago. You do realize that this is the same type of rationalizations that fuel wars. Wow, how very open-minded of you.

      “Heck, I wouldn’t visit the South because the soil is completely tainted.”

      Oh, well that is certainly your choice. The term South can cover alot of territory. Does your generosity include south Florida, south Texas, and southern Arizona and New Mexico or are your horizons much narrow in scope. Well your choice! Happy travels! I’m betting that you won’t be visiting Alaska anytime soon, since Palin’s territory must be tainted too.

      Like

      1. How about all the US territories where the indigenous people were exterminated?

        Sheesh, we’ll soon be left with nowhere to go in this country at all if we try to avoid places that have no tragic history attached to them. And it’s the same for the rest of the world, of course.

        Like

    3. “Heck, I wouldn’t visit the South because the soil is completely tainted.”

      And here we have the most bigoted comment yet to be heard on this blog.

      “I would think very badly of anyone who I found out owned a slave or had ancestors who owned slaves.”

      Now how are you going to apply this standard? You probably don’t have an inkling of who *anyone’s* ancestors were. I suspect that most people had slave-owning ancestors, which would make you a hell of a misanthrope.

      Let’s start with your ancestors.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.