« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Why They Hate Trig Palin

By: Paul Mitchell (Diary)  |  April 21st, 2011 at 09:37 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Every politician makes political appearances with their kids. Every candidate makes campaign appearances and produces campaign materials that include their kids. The Clintons did it with Chelsea, the Obamas do it with their daughters, I did it with my kids.

But one politician — just one — has taken flack for appearing with one — just one! — of her kids. That politician is former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. And the child they hate to see her with is her youngest, Trig, who has Down Syndrome.

Make no mistake. The left hates Trig Palin:

Now Wonkette is at it again, in an even more crude manner, this time authored by 2010 Georgetown grad  Jack Stuef, Greatest Living American: A Children’s Treasury of Trig Crap On His Birthday.

Replete with PhotoShops of Trig next to a pulsating pole dancer (image right), and links to videos in which various Democrats mock Trig in profanity-laced tirades, Stuef has a good laugh with text such as this:

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.) It doesn’t matter. What matters is that we are privileged to live in a time when we can witness the greatest prop in world political history…

What’s he dreaming about? Nothing. He’s retarded.

Wonkette is no fly-by-night outfit.  Here is how it describes itself on its Advertising page:

Wonkette.com is a top 5,000 site and No. 63 Technorati blog that reaches over 1 million monthly unique visitors, 88% of which are in the U.S. The site is wildly popular among a mostly male, very affluent and well educated adult crowd. The typical visitor reads Gawker and subscribes to the Economist and Vanity Fair.

Winner of three consecutive Bloggies and a regular source of outrageous quotes and jokes for the political class, Wonkette is Washington’s non-stop campaign cocktail party.

Wonkette is a sick publication.  But it sure is popular with the liberal D.C. crowd.

Outrageous. Some some folks complained to the advertisers on that site, and three of them pulled their ads. Papa John’s, Huggies and Vanguard. The editors at Wonkette defend the post:

“We beat up on Sarah Palin’s craven use of her son as a political prop. Child protective services should take Trig away.”

“On whose account are you requesting that Jack Stuef remove a post mocking Sarah Palin’s well-documented use of her special needs child as a political prop?…”

It’s easy to see that the left hates Sarah Palin with the hot, hot fire of a thousand suns. And the real reason for this hatred is Trig. They hate Trig with every fiber of their being. They hate him with a passion beyond description. Murder would not satisfy their hatred of Trig, because they hate most of all the fact that this baby was ever born.

If Sarah Palin had aborted Trig, she would be a hero to the left. But she kept him, she loves him, Down Syndrome and all. And they hate that.

The abortion ethic holds that only the perfect baby is worthy to be born. The abortion ethic holds that only the wealthy baby is worthy to be born. Trig stands as a living rebuke to the pro-aborts, who, in him, are revealed not to be pro-choice at all, but only pro-abortion. Trig Palin, by simply living, is a testament to the dignity and sanctity of all human life. The pro-abort left cannot abide, and cannot tolerate, his witness.

And so they make up lies and excuses for their hatred about Sarah Palin’s “exploitation” of her son. Of course, if Trig was never seen in her materials and appearances, they would claim that she was ashamed of him, that she was hiding him. It’s not that they see Trig that enrages them; it is that Trig lives at all. Modern liberalism is a philosophy of hatred, of jealousy, of death. The left’s reaction to Trig Palin is the logical expression of that philosophy.

(Cross-posted from Thoughts of a Regular Guy.)

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    Time to put up a post about the Democratic Party’s special needs affirmative action poster boy.

    • jstjoan

      http://twitter.com/#!/DLoesch/integrity/members

  • Moriah

    Yes, I’m a liberal. And it’s times like these I’m ashamed of others who claim that label.

    My mother chose to keep me or I wouldn’t be here today. She chose that despite the fact that it might possibly put her in a life-or-death situation. It did. In 1980 vasa previa with marginal placenta previa was exceedingly bad news if it was undetected until labor, as it was in my case. When the doctors realized the situation they asked her whose life she wanted to put first. She chose mine… she chose me twice. We both had to have blood transfusions and both nearly died. (Obstetrics has improved a great deal in 30 yers and the complication of pregnancy that nearly killed us is now able to be detected long before labor.)

    Since I had been without oxygen and had significant transfusions given my tiny size compared to when an adult receives a transfusion, they weren’t sure how much brain damage I might have sustained. Cerebral palsy was mentioned as a possibility. As I grew, my parents said they counted themselves lucky if I actually had suffered any brain damage — they could barely keep up with me as it was. I was lucky, period.

    As a person who is pro-choice mainly because I think a person’s body is their own, and value individual choice over force, the suggestion that my mother’s willingness to sacrifice for me would have been anything less than the beautiful choice it was if I’d actually sustained brain damage astounds me. Which is what suggesting that Sarah’s choice — that she likely made long before she knew about his condition, just as Mom made hers before she knew how well I would come through birth — is wrong amounts to.

    Parenting is a beautiful choice. Adoption is a beautiful choice. Abortion is a very ugly choice. If one thinks the ugly choice should be protected, don’t judge those who make the beautiful ones. I know a couple who, when told their son had bilateral kidney agenesis and would die within 24 hours of birth, chose to meet their son if they were allowed that opportunity and have what time they could with him. It was much shorter than 24 hours. But the husband still has a picture of his son on his cubicle wall. The situation was heartbreaking but the choice was still beautiful.

    I personally do not think Palin would be the best president. But it has nothing to do with the fruits of her womb or the choices she has made about family planning — saying she wasn’t qualified because she has young children offends me because when have we ever said that about a male candidate? Saying she’s a bad mother because she has chosen the career path she has, and applied for the second toughest job in the world? C’mon, my party has been the one to say women are entitled to career and family both, changing tunes just because the career woman happens to be conservative is hogwash. And to be so exceedingly curious about her obstetric history absolutely infuriates me to no end… I don’t want the government in my medical records, so why should the nosy general public have any right to question what is discussed between me and my doctor? Or Sarah and her doctor?

    Maybe I’m a feminist even more than I’m a liberal, but I feel the two go together. The hypocrisy I’ve seen in response to Sarah Palin drives me just a touch batty. And in 2008 when my fellow liberals were being driven batty themselves by what they saw as smear campaigns against their candidate, it angered me greatly to read smear conspiracy theories… especially since this particular one involved two children who never asked to be put in media spotlight. It still angers me. Sorry for the rant but I get a lot of flack when I say this elsewhere sometimes…

    • David123
    • Flagstaff

      that I am withholding any response, other than to say that although we probably disagree about some things, I didn’t find anything you wrote disagreeable.

    • gekster

      God bless those who choose life.
      The fact that the lefties can’t stand those who don’t do what they think is right is a testament to how evil they are.
      God bless your Mom.

      • msctex

        The forerunners of our modern Progressives were the folks who brought us the brand of Eugenics which so impressed Hitler*, as well as M. Sanger’s proactive approach to the same issue. One of the things they take for granted is that there are too many people in the world, and it is but a small step to then picking and choosing who should qualify for the right to live.

        * no Godwin’s Law violation if it is provably so.

        • lukematthews

          They want to be the arbiters of what is acceptable and what is not. They want to be able to cull the herd to their liking. This is just a sick example of their adherence to Buck v. Bell’s ‘three generations of imbeciles is enough,’ as though they were omniscient enough to know what’s best for mankind. They belie their ‘compassion’ through despicable rants like this. Their lack of a moral compass is staggering in its utter contempt for other people.
          What a bunch of sad, perverse clowns hoping to achieve relevance and self-worth through trashing other people’s existence.

    • mspector

      Many of us have made the journey from the left to conservatism. It’s a familiar story yet one which is new with each one who makes it. Sometimes you find yourself confronted with contradictions that are so stark it is impossible not to examine them closely and find their roots. If you do so, I think you will find that feminism and conservatism are not counterposed. I think you will find that the hypocrisy you so eloquently identify is not merely the product of uninformed opinion but endemic to liberalism itself. I think you will find that conservatism is the world view that in fact speaks to the highest and best aspirations of humanity, aspirations you obviously share. Please stick around.

  • http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

    Satan HATES babies, because each and every one is a divine being in the image and likeness of God who will live forever and can never be wiped out. Satan perceives each and every new human being as a personal affront.

    And this is the spirit that animates both the pro-abortion mentality and the Communist anti-human mentality. This is why there is so much overlap between atheists, pro-aborts and Leftists.

    • kestrel

      or compassion or positive human interaction for which they can’t take credit, they have to trash it, smash it, mutilate it and cover it in obscenity. Apart from election fraud, I agree with the commentators who say these people should be the easiest to beat in 2012.

  • Doc Holliday

    wonkette called for all lefty slimes to boycott Pappa Johns because of their decency.

    • ruexperienced
  • http://dreamsfrommyforefathers.com RoguePolitics

    Which I gather you get.

    On an aside Wonkette as you quoted:

    “The site is wildly popular among a mostly male, very affluent and well educated adult crowd. The typical visitor reads Gawker and subscribes to the Economist and Vanity Fair.”

    “Mostly men”, “very affluent” and “subscribes to …. Vanity Fair.” hmmmm

    I wonder what we can deduce from that description?

    For starters, I think they left out “neat freak” and “snazzy dresser.”

  • renny

    candidate due to his terrible bowling? And what is the worst the left can call the tea parties? Tea baggers, a pejorative for gays, whom liberals supposedly understand, feel compassion for, and love.

    Pressed by very little, anyone on the left is liable to hurl the f-bomb, as each speaks like guttersnipes at every turn, so that his/her scurilous vernacular can supposedly mimic “real” street people, whom the left always cares for and represents, altho’ invariably everyone went to Yale and Hahvahd and made cheerleading his major sport.

    This is a huge digression, but in 1967, visiting in-laws at Yale, another party invitee spent the evening telling me how much he loved cheerleading and how Israel was really an agressive and vicious little country we should treat as we had the Nazis. I didn’t realize until much later that what we face today was already moving into place before the 1968 Big Mobes in NYC or the takeover of Columbia (what we call “the 60s”) and now is entirely settled into the State Department, the CIA, prob. much of the Pentagon, and all the MSM.

    It’s a long thread to disentanlge, and we have barely begun.

  • jstjoan

    from W*nkette. Appropriately, the list is entitled “Integrity”

  • mspector

    I think that the thing that above all else makes the left crazy is that Sarah is who she says she is, and she lives the principles she articulates. She is Christian, feminist, pro-life and pro-family, pursuing a career. Those who make a life out of embracing the failings and foibles of their heroes can’t stand it. She is who she says she is, and that makes her a beacon. Trig is a lamp unto her feet.

  • danielhill2008

    Every time I think the left can’t possibly go any lower, along comes some despicable bag of puke, Jack Stuef in this case, and proves me wrong once again. Enjoy your eternal lake of fire, you miserable waste of skin.

  • Doc Holliday

    nine so far

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/onmedia/0411/Advertisers_boycott_Wonkette_over_Trig_Palin_post.html

    I hope this goes to the top, the left needs to take their own medicine. These people are truly sick, they need mental help.

  • Flagstaff

    it is very probably actionable as libel. It’s clearly said with malice; therefore the “public figure” protection is lost.

  • izoneguy

    Is that covered under ObamaCare?

  • rickbull

    That Obamacare would provide mental health counseling to the oh-so-many on the left who are in such desperate need of it . . .