Sarah Palin: “I Don't Hire No Steenking Negros!”
Aw come on, nobody’s perfect. So she’s a racist. But she is NOT a witch. And that’s certifiable. The Bishop has given his official verdict on the Governor’s Mansion: This house is clean.
The racism story comes from Gwen Alexander, president of the African-American Historical Society of Alaska. Last April fourteen black leaders in Alaska met with Palin to complain about a lack of job opportunities for minorities. Blacks only make up 4% of Alaska’s population. But when you add Eskimos, Aleuts, Indians and Asians, minorities make up a quarter of the population. Whatever your stereotype of Alaska may be, it's one of the country’s most ethnically diverse states.
Anyway, during this meeting, Palin told the group that she didn’t have to hire any blacks, and furthermore she didn’t intend to. So there.
But remember now, taking the good with the bad — she is not a witch. In May of 2005, Sarah Palin took part in an exorcism by the Bishop Thomas Muthee, from Kenya. (Irony alert: Bishop Thomas Muthee is…[gasp]…a Negro!)
Here is a YouTube video showing the evil spirits being driven from our future vice president. Enjoy.
In other news from the All Sarah All The Time Network: she won't reveal any personal financial information until after her debate with Joe Biden. That gives us two things to look forward to.
She’s been cramming like crazy for this debate and she’s ready to kick some butt. She can already recite the entire Bush Doctrine, she’s doing research on the Nuremburg Trials after the Korean War, and she can name three countries.
cross-posted at Bring It On!
Labels: Bishop Thomas Muthee Sarah Palin, Gwen Alexander president African-American Historical Society of Alaska, Sarah Palin personal finances debate
posted by Tom Harper @ 11:05 AM
20 Comments:
"She's a witch!"
Well, if you've seen Holy Grail, you know the rest. I really hope she performs an exorcism during the debate.
"The power of Alaska compels you!"
"The power of Alaska compels you!"
Randal: Or maybe Jesus can whisper the answers to her during the debate. "Psssst: Jesus! Where's France?"
Why the Shock?
She's a Republican!
Case Closed
Erik
OK
I guess I should quantify that but I'm not in the mood of going through the GOP dumping civil rights since the reconstruction or embracing the racist south, or Nixon, Reagan, or the 2 Bushes, or Trent Lott et. al., et.al, et. al.,
Do I?
Erik
Erik: But somehow, every time you think things are improving, some asshole comes along and makes it obvious that they aren't.
Erik: You're saying the GOP has been against civil rights? Blasphemy :)
The "hockey mom" also had her boytoy named today. This isn't turning out to be the best month she's ever had.
JR: Ah yes, the queen of "family values." Funny how the Right didn't seem too bothered by the Enquirer when they revealed John Edwards' affair a few months ago.
Can you blame Moosalini? They probably didn't have black people in Wasilla, so she didn't know any to appoint to government positions.
Lew: That's true, since most of her appointees are people she's known since grade school back in Wasilla. A small-town girl from an isolated state, and suddenly she thinks she's ready to lead the Free World.
The Kenyan cleric with the thing about witches is bizarre. What else can you say?
About that article: The writer, Earl Ofari Hutchinson, said Palin met with 14 black people, yet he evidently contacted only one of them for comment. Hutchinson frames the claim about Palin's statement as the "allegation."
Hutchinson then cites several presumably Palin-friendly sources who all deny the charge.
The headline is written as a question.
So, why didn't Hutchinson contact at least one or two more of the meeting participants for verification, then report it as fact or as a false or highly quesionable charge, depending on what he learned from the second and third sources?
Something doesn't add up here.
BTW, I'm not making a case Palin is free of prejudice. I don't know. I just wouldn't draw any hard conclusions on the basis of that particular article.
If all this true, that she don't have to hire Blacks and the story that Jolly is running, that she has a lover.
What was McCain doing and why would we elect such people to run this country during these times.
Burn her! Burn her!
Biden's gonna smoke her in the debate.
Can you imagine the fallout if Obama had said he wouldn't hire whites, or Hispanics?
SW: True, this is one of those allegations that can't be proven or disproven. But there's a war going on (that's what this election has turned into, whether we like it or not) and I'm stooping to the same gutter tactics that the Right has been using since 1988. I'm not proud of it, but sometimes you've gotta do what you've gotta do.
Let's Talk: I'm pretty sure this wasn't McCain's decision. I think some of the rightwing puppetmasters -- Kristol, Dobson, Norquist -- made this choice so McCain could get "the base" all fired up.
Carlos: That's gonna be fun to watch, Palin coming unraveled on nationwide TV as Biden pounces all over her with facts.
Candace: Yes, the fallout would be deafening.
I look forward to the debate. Biden will eat her alive. It would have been more fun with Hillary, however.
The stupidity of Palin is without boundaries. Even the neo-cons don't see her as fit for office.
Tom Harper wrote: "True, this is one of those allegations that can't be proven or disproven. But there's a war going on. . ."
I never meant to suggest you are using gutter tactics, or anything like that. I hope my previous comment didn't give that impression.
I just raised a red flag about a story that fails to meet a simple journalistic standard of verification, with no hint given as to why it failed to do that. A second source saying "Yes, Palin said such and such," or the opposite, would've allowed the writer to write it one way or the other as fact, not as allegation or question.
The usual approach when verification isn't possible is to include something like, "Others who attended the meeting refused comment or did not return our calls." Obviously, that's only good if the writer actually tried to contact the others.
I suspect not just writer failure but editor failure at the publication. Something's weird, that's for sure.
Again, I didn't mean to knock your post, Tom. It's a legitimate and interesting issue to discuss.
Enemy: Yup, I'm looking forward to seeing Palin self-destruct when she tries to debate Biden. And I'm hoping McCain comes unraveled on tonight's debate. (I'm assuming tonight's debate is still on, in about 90 minutes.)
SW: No problem, I didn't take offense at your comment. I was aware when I did this post that it was based on "he said she said," and I usually try not to do posts just based on that. But during this "war," the Right -- the candidates, speechwriters, bloggers -- is pulling out all the stops. No holds barred. And that's what the Left needs to do if we don't want Obama to go the way of Al Gore and John Kerry.
After the election I'll go back to fighting clean, but in the meantime it'll be 5-1/2 weeks of eye-gouging and knee-breaking. I'm not saying it's right...
Wow, Tom you've got quite the eye for finding some odd stuff. I am in shock. I think the Bishop better go back with some more powerful Cardinals, or something. I am positive he missed something.
Wait, She has to believe for it to work. If she doesn't like blacks, then she might not have taken it seriously???
That's it!!! The witch had the plan to get the procedure from a black man... Awe, she does have secret fetishes!!
United In Peace And Freedom
AHB: Yes, there's a conspiracy in here somewhere. She hired a black Bishop from a furrin country to ward off evil spirits. I get it now. If this didn't work, it's all the fault of them Negros, furriners and evil spirits.
Why, this shrewd lady could be president someday.
Post a Comment
<< Home