Month: July 2009

A new paper suggests they are mutually exclusive:

The BBC profiles a British activist who helped hasten the end of the Jesse Helms ban on HIV-positive tourists, visitors and immigrants to the United States. The ban's repeal is in its final bureaucratic stages and we are now in a public comment period. If you agree that this unique legislative 1987 ban on people with HIV should finally leave the books, here's a very easy, 30-seconds online option to submit your support for the change for the public record. Please do, if you want to end the stigma of HIV that this ban has sustained. You helped lobby to get the law changed; now, if you have a moment, you could add your name to the public comment option set up by the feds to register public comments.

John Kerry's explanation of why this matters is after the jump. Republican senator Gordon Smith was also central. The Bush administration supported lifting the ban too. I obviously have a vested interest in this as I have long explained. But it matters for so many more, much less privileged than me, and for the honor and decency of the United States of America. Just add your name here.

Larison is calm as ever:

Never has a major political candidate been so poorly served by her own supporters. To quote that Russian proverb again, “The yes-man is your enemy, but your friend will argue with you.” Palin was surrounded and cheered on by almost nothing but yes-men, because once anyone tried to offer any kind of criticism that person seemed to become persona non grata in her circle and in the wider conservative world pretty quickly.

The Juneau Empire bids the whack-job adieu.

"We had no idea it was coming. Nobody seemed to know; they're extremely private people," – Jim Palin, Sarah's father-in-law.

One theory worth floating is that Palin resigned so quickly and abruptly and self-destructively that she did it in order to appease someone threatening her with exposure of something or other. That would imply we will never know the real reason. I have no clue except that whatever scandal she was facing, she'd have a better go at it as governor. Unless it's so crippling she would have to quit regardless. But since her own explanations makes no sense at all, we are left to wonder. So wonder we shall.

A reader writes:

The Schwenkler challenge to your curiosity about the Palin pregnancy stories is the classic "straw man" argument – mischaracterize your opponent's position and then debate the mischaracterization.

Those who disbelieve Palin on her bizarre pregnancy story don't suggest that she concocted a phony motherhood of Trig in order to curry right-wing support by creating an image of herself as a 100% pure pro-lifer. The disbelievers — I am one — suggest that she was concealing the pregnancy of a daughter, a centuries-old practice.

My twist on the suspicion:

not only did Palin fake the whole broken-water, multi-leg, commercial flight, long-distance return to Wasilla, but Trig was not born on that same morning or even in that same month. Remember, if the Palins hide the birth certificate in order to conceal the identity of the mother, that also affords them the ability to conceal the date of birth. If you recall, the pregnancy of daughter Bristol that came to light during the campaign was raised by the Palins in order to refute the possibility that Trig could be Bristol's son, but the later pregnancy of Bristol only proves that she cannot be the mother of Trig if Trig were born at the conclusion of the spectacular — and unlikely — return from Texas.

And this, I suggest, is the reason for the fabricated story of what, if true, would have been the most reckless pregnancy on record. I feel a little unsavory discussing the birth circumstances of a baby, even moreso one with Down's Syndrome. And I hate to allege a birth certificate-related conspiracy at the same time that others — with whom I would prefer not to be lumped — allege that President Obama hasn't proved he was born in the United States. But I ask you, is Sarah Palin dishonest enough to concoct such a lie?

Of course she's crazy enough to concoct such a lie – especially when she was merely governor of Alaska. But I do not know if this is true, and it is unlikely, if possible. My only request is that someone ask her on the record or get some proof. That's all I've asked since last August: for reporters to do their jobs.

"Second, we don’t know what she will do in the private sector. Will she write a thoughtful book? Become a syndicated columnist whose ideas make her a “must read” for everyone? Will she found an important new think tank? An important journal? Spearhead an effort to help the unemployed? Decide to launch a business? Or maybe she will start a new political party?" – Jim Prevor, Weekly Standard.

Reihan Salam puts his chips on "Palin as entertainer":

Radio is too hard: you have to know something and be able to sustain an argument. She knows nothing and cannot string a logical sentence together. My bet is on some celebreality show. Or The View. She is as vacuous as Hasselbeck and shares the same grasp of natural history as Sherri Shepherd. Or a surreal Christianist version of "My Life On The D-List." There's a lot of camp value begging to be mined.