Summing up the Giffords shooting

Indian Comics Irregular #201:  Hate Speech Leads to Hate Acts

Mocking the hatemongers' denial

I've enjoyed ridiculing the conservative claim that violent and hate-filled rhetoric doesn't and can't affect anyone. You've seen my Newspaper Rock postings on the subject: Tim Wise on Loughner's Paranoia, Conservative Hatemongers Deny Responsibility, and Words Don't Trigger Actions?! Here are more of my comments from Facebook:

Conservatives: Can we agree that Timothy McVeigh was influenced by right-wing extremism? Or do you want to defend and excuse his behavior too?

Possible political campaign slogans: "We're going to shoot our opponents in the head--but with ballots, not bullets." "We're going to shoot them until they're dead--politically speaking." Because this kind of rhetoric doesn't inflame or influence anyone, right?

I guess all the death threats Obama has received are just "metaphorical" death threats, right? "We want Obama to die and burn in hell, but not really"? I guess the Secret Service can ignore this kind of conservative rhetoric because nobody would ever act on his deep-seated hatred of liberals, minorities, and non-believers. Am I right, people?

News flash: Conservative researchers have determined that no one in Nazi Germany was influenced by ideological hate speech. Incredibly, 80 million mentally unstable people with a propensity for ethnically-oriented violence just happened to gather in one spot. What are the odds?!

It seems impossible, yet conservatives assure us that ideology can't motivate anyone to act. Amazing!

Said one Austrian neighbor, "Those 80 million Germans were always quiet and kept to themselves. They seemed like good boys and girls. I had no idea they'd turn into mass murderers."

Palin's "blood libel"

Sarah Palin opened a whole new avenue of mockery with her defense of her bullseye on Gabrielle Giffords:

Sarah Palin's charge of 'blood libel' spurs outcry from Jewish leaders

By James Oliphant"Instead of dialing down the rhetoric at this difficult moment, Sarah Palin chose to accuse others trying to sort out the meaning of this tragedy of somehow engaging in a 'blood libel' against her and others," said David Harris, president of the National Democratic Jewish Council, in a statement. "This is of course a particularly heinous term for American Jews, given that the repeated fiction of blood libels are directly responsible for the murder of so many Jews across centuries--and given that blood libels are so directly intertwined with deeply ingrained anti-Semitism around the globe, even today."

"The term 'blood libel' is not a synonym for 'false accusation,'" said Simon Greer, president of Jewish Funds for Justice. "It refers to a specific falsehood perpetuated by Christians about Jews for centuries, a falsehood that motivated a good deal of anti-Jewish violence and discrimination. Unless someone has been accusing Ms. Palin of killing Christian babies and making matzoh from their blood, her use of the term is totally out of line."Palin comes out swinging, and misses

Sarah Palin had a chance with her statement on the Tucson tragedy to show voters she's equal to the demands of the presidency. But her video reflected her chosen role as lightning rod of the right.

By Doyle McManusPalin was justified in accusing her critics of unfairness in using the tragedy as a talking point and in pointing a finger at her. But she went much further than that: She asserted that their argument "serves only to incite … violence."

Consider that assertion for a moment: Palin says her words could not possibly have created a climate of violence, but claims her opponents' words are certain to.

What was missing in her statement? Any acknowledgment, even implicit, that anyone on her own side had ever stepped over the line as well.News flash: To honor the post-Tucson calls for civility, conservatives have decided to rename "death panels" as "dispose of grandma prematurely panels." "We thought that would be less negative and confrontational," said one right-winger.

News flash: Liberals are considering calling the Tea Party's use of the term "death panels" the worst "blood libel" since Hitler. "We'd do it," said one leftist, "but we understand the term's significance, unlike stupid conservatives."

"My accusation that liberals want to kill grandma is totally different from their accusation that I want to kill Gabrielle Giffords," said a whining Sarah Palin. "I put a bullseye on her, so I really mean it.

"Or is it the other way around...?" she continued, looking like a deer in the headlights. "It's so hard to tell without the answers written on my hand."

"When we called them death panels," said a teary-eyed Palin as her presidential chances went up in a puff of smoke, "we thought it was just a cute nickname. We didn't expect anyone to take us seriously. Everyone knows this kind of rhetoric can't change anyone's opinions."

Conclusion

Have I made the point clear? Or do I need to continue mocking the hatemongers' denial of fomenting the violence they fomented?

For typical examples of the hatemongers' rhetoric, see Conservatives Attack "Ugly" Native Prayer and Obama's UN "Coup" Is "Chilling."

Below:  Obama prepares to help his brown-skinned tribal brothers by giving away the US, according to conservative hatemongers who say he's a traitor, a terrorist, and the anti-Christ.

Political vitriol in the Giffords shooting

Toxic U.S. political climate blamed in Tucson killing spree

By Calvin Woodward and Charles BabingtonSen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Democratic leader in the Senate, on Sunday cited imagery of crosshairs on political opponents and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s combative rallying cry, “Don’t retreat; reload.”

“These sorts of things, I think, invite the kind of toxic rhetoric that can lead unstable people to believe this is an acceptable response,” Durbin said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

The attack might be the work of “a single nut,” Democratic Rep. Raul Grijalva, whose Arizona district shares Tucson with Giffords’ district, said Saturday, the day Giffords was shot. But he said the nation must assess the fallout of “an atmosphere where the political discourse is about hate, anger and bitterness.”

Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, who is teamed with federal authorities in a joint investigation, emerged as a particularly outspoken figure after warning Saturday that “freedom of speech does not come without consequences” and describing Arizona as “the capital, the mecca, for prejudice and bigotry.”

On Sunday Dupnik expanded on the warning, saying, “when the rhetoric about hatred, about mistrust of government, about paranoia of how government operates” reaches a fever pitch, it “has impact on people, especially (those) who are unbalanced personalities to begin with.”A Turning Point in the Discourse, but in Which Direction?

By Matt BaiIt wasn’t clear Saturday whether the alleged shooter in Tucson was motivated by any real political philosophy or by voices in his head, or perhaps by both. But it’s hard not to think he was at least partly influenced by a debate that often seems to conflate philosophical disagreement with some kind of political Armageddon.

The problem here doesn’t lie with the activists like most of those who populate the Tea Parties, ordinary citizens who are doing what citizens are supposed to do—engaging in a conversation about the direction of the country. Rather, the problem would seem to rest with the political leaders who pander to the margins of the margins, employing whatever words seem likely to win them contributions or TV time, with little regard for the consequences.

Consider the comments of Sharron Angle, the Tea Party favorite who unsuccessfully ran against Harry Reid for the Senate in Nevada last year. She talked about “domestic enemies” in the Congress and said, “I hope we’re not getting to Second Amendment remedies.” Then there’s Rick Barber, a Republican who lost his primary in a Congressional race in Alabama, but not before airing an ad in which someone dressed as George Washington listened to an attack on the Obama agenda and gravely proclaimed, “Gather your armies.”

In fact, much of the message among Republicans last year, as they sought to exploit the Tea Party phenomenon, centered—like the Tea Party moniker itself—on this imagery of armed revolution. Popular spokespeople like Ms. Palin routinely drop words like “tyranny” and “socialism” when describing the president and his allies, as if blind to the idea that Americans legitimately faced with either enemy would almost certainly take up arms.Pointing fingers at the right

A columnist puts the blame where it belongs:

The Wrath of Fools:  An Open Letter to the Far Right

By William Rivers PittI just thought you should know a few things about the people you helped into their graves and hospital beds this weekend.

Yes, you.

You false patriots who bring assault rifles to political rallies, you hack politicians and media personalities who lied through your stinking teeth about "death panels" and "Obama is coming for your guns" and "He isn't a citizen" and "He's a secret Muslim" and "Sharia Law is coming to America," you who spread this bastard gospel and you who swallowed it whole, I am talking to you, because this was your doing just as surely as it was the doing of the deranged damned soul who pulled the trigger. The poison you injected into our culture is deeply culpable for this carnage.

You who worship Jesus at the top of your lungs (in defiance of Christ's own teachings on the matter of worship, by the way) helped put several churchgoers into their graves and into the hospital. You who shriek about the sanctity of marriage helped cut down a man who was about to be married. You who crow with ceaseless abandon about military service and the nobility of our fighting forces helped to critically wound the wife of a Naval aviator who fought for you in a war. You who hold September 11 as your sword and shield helped put a little girl born on that day into the ground.

You helped. Yes, damn you, you helped.

The "mainstream" media is already working overtime playing up the "Disturbed loner" angle with all their might. There is no doubt, from the available evidence, of Mr. Loughner's transformation into a disturbed individual. But here's the funny part: all the crazy crap he spewed, about the gold standard (a favorite of Glenn Beck, the master of Fox "News" fearmongering...so he can sell his gold scam to suckers) and government mind control and everything else before going on his rampage, is straight out of the Right-Wing Insanity Handbook. His personal YouTube ramblings were a mishmash of right-wing anti-government nonsense...the kind that attracts sick minds like Loughner, the kind that only reinforces their paranoia, the kind that finally pushes them over the brink and into the frenzy of violence that took place on Saturday. The kind that the likes of you have been happily spreading by the day.

He did not act alone. You were right there with him. You helped.Conservative crybabies can't take it

It's hilarious to hear conservatives crybabies whine about liberals pointing out their hate speech. Boo-hoo, you big babies! And to hear moderates whine about the political vitriol on both sides. News flash: It's ridiculous to equate hate speech with pointing out hate speech. One is the problem and the other is the solution.

Here's a good critique of the false equivalence conservatives are drawing between the right and the left:

When It Comes to the Rhetoric of Rage, the Right Has the Edge

By David CornThere is indeed over-the-top talk on the left. During the Bush years, far-left protesters at anti-war rallies referred to Bush and Dick Cheney as fascists. Conspiracy theorists on the left claimed the Bush-Cheney crew had started the Afghanistan and Iraq wars to enrich their pals in the oil and contracting industries. Some lefties (and righties) accused the president of having staged 9/11--or of allowing it to happen--so he'd have a pretext for war. It was hateful stuff. But this rhetoric tended not to imply violence or insurrection. More to the point, such excessive rhetoric was not adopted and/or accepted by Democratic leaders.Right. When liberals hate the president, they talk about impeachment. When conservatives hate the president, they talk about violence.

While we're at it, spare me talk about Loughner's "personal responsibility" for his actions. These pundits have taken that into consideration. They didn't say the conservative rhetoric compelled him to act.

Rather, they're talking about the "toxic rhetoric" and hate-filled "atmosphere" that can "lead unstable people to believe this is an acceptable response." "[T]he kind that attracts sick minds like Loughner, the kind that only reinforces their paranoia, the kind that finally pushes them over the brink." Unless you can prove Loughner never heard this political vitriol and wasn't influenced by it, don't bother arguing the point.

For more on the subject, see Loughner Echoes Right-Wing Extremists and Words Don't Trigger Actions?!

A history of conservative hate speech

Are the examples of conservative vitriol noted in Political Vitriol in the Giffords Shooting, Debating Loughner's Influences, and Shooter Hits Palin's Target some sort of unusual or unplanned happenstance? No.

Preliminary report finds extensive use of hate speech on conservative talk radio

By Letisia MarquezThe study found that:

* Dehumanizing metaphors were used in 185 statements. Such metaphors evoked warfare, heroism, enemies, biblical characters, criminality, persecution and other representations.

* There were 77 instances of flawed argumentation, including ad hominem statements, guilt by association, and hidden assumptions or missing premises.

* Divisive language was used in 79 instances, in which individuals were presented in an "us versus them" framework as either supporting or opposing the show's worldview.

* 33 false statements were used to validate the hosts' points and to promote public opinion. A false statement is a simple falsehood, exaggerated statement or decontextualized fact that renders a statement misleading.A list of 116 examples of conservatives promoting violence against political opponents since 2008:

Insurrectionism TimelineOn June 26, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court embraced the National Rifle Association's contention that the Second Amendment provides individuals with the right to take violent action against our government should it become "tyrannical." The following timeline catalogues incidents of insurrectionist violence (or the promotion of such violence) that have occurred since that decision was issued.A dozen examples from conservative campaigns in 2010:

Before Shooting, A Campaign Season Rife With Gun Rhetoric

Examples from Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and other leading voices in the right-wing media:

Let's Get This Straight

Conservative cheerleader Ann Coulter alone has issued a plethora of hate-filled threats and wishes, as noted here:

Exclusive:  Conservative Group Denounces Ann Coulter!

Nor is this kind of vitriol anything new. Another seven examples from 1995 to 2002:

The Wrath of Fools:  An Open Letter to the Far Right

Of course, we've seen many examples of conservatives advocating hate and violence since 9/11: against Arabs, Muslims, terrorist suspects, anti-war activists, political dissenters, Julian Assange and Wikileaks, and others. The list goes on and on.

Hate speech is conservative strategy

Nor is all this political vitriol just the random workings of the political marketplace. Rather, it's an intentional, calculated strategy by conservatives to demonize their opponents.

Hate Speech:  The Right’s Magic Bullet

By Michael WinshipThe fact is, it has been the right's goal to poison our political discourse for years. Remember the notorious “GOPAC Memo” back in the 1990’s, created for the Republicans’ leadership training institute and endorsed by Newt Gingrich? Titled "Language: A Key Mechanism of Control,” in it, candidates are instructed in what words to use when defining their opponents (i.e., liberals). "These are powerful words that can create a clear and easily understood contract,” the memo said. “Apply these to the opponent, their record, proposals, and their party” (in other words, demonize them).

Among them: intolerant… lie… pathetic… radical… sick… steal… traitors. Gingrich and his allies deliberately set out to employ toxic language against their opponents, and are still doing it. They will say anything to get a vote, especially now that the angriest and most irrational so often make up a majority of those who bother to go to the polls. This kind of talk is part and parcel of their strategy, and no matter what motivated the Tucson killings, it needs to stop.

Their lock and load rhetoric is reinforced by the rambling ranks of those who go on the Internet to spout any conspiracy theory, distortion of history or outright lie that helps them make it through the night. Add, too, the men and women of radio and television, the Limbaugh’s, Beck’s, and their ilk who use the airwaves as a cudgel, battering viewers and listeners with the certainty of their illogic, their thinly veiled messages of bigotry and meretricious embrace of Constitution, religion, flag and family.

All of them will huff and puff that this is an isolated incident by a madman that cannot be blamed on their bombast and bluster. But let’s call it out for what it is, let’s debate what in our gut we know to be true: even if it was not their intent, it’s likely the words of the right on radio and TV and in the books they publish spurred on the man who killed two and wounded six in a Knoxville, Kentucky, church in July 2008, and the murderer of George Tiller, one of the few doctors in America who still performed late-term abortions for women with problem pregnancies whose health was at stake from life-threatening complications, or whose infants would be born dead or dying. Their invective, whether inadvertently or not, has encouraged the vandalism and threats faced by so many of our candidates and elected officials, including the now desperately wounded Congresswoman Giffords. Her shooting, and the death and wounding of so many who came to meet with her are just the latest example of ideologically-motivated bloodshed.Nor did the vitriol begin with Gingrich's memo, alas. It goes back to Nixon's Southern strategy--painting Democrats as race traitors--and McCarthy-era witch hunts questioning the patriotism of liberals.

Conclusion

Conservatives are already arguing that their hate speech is no different from what liberals say about them. Great. I look forward to seeing the evidence of the violence and death threats issued by major Democratic politicians and pundits against Republicans and their families.

Repeat: major Democratic politicians and pundits, not random cranks and bloggers like me. Go through the writings of Michael Moore, Arianna Huffington, Paul Krugman, Al Franken, et al. and find the instances where these people wished or threatened physical violence against their opponents.

I imagine conservatives already have collected and posted this evidence. So let's see the links, good buddies. I can take it if you can.

For more on the subject, see Sherrod Incident Shows Conservative Tactics and Any Excuse to Hate Obama.

Shooter hits Palin's target

The story that dominated the news Saturday was the murderous attack by suspect Jared Lee Loughner on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Tucson). Not coincidentally, he targeted one of the liberal politicians on Sarah Palin's hit list:

Sarah Palin's PAC Puts Gun Sights On Democrats She's Targeting In 2010Sarah Palin is targeting--yes, with gun sights--House Democrats facing tough reelection fights who voted for health care reform.

Palin's Facebook page now carries a map featuring 20 gun sights, one for each of the Democrats targeted this year by her political action committee SarahPAC. Three of the gun sights, those where incumbent Democrats have already announced their retirement, are colored red.

Comment:  There's no truth to the rumor that Sarah Palin updated her website to say: "One down, 16 more to go."

Palin to Giffords: "We meant to target and shoot you only with rhetorical bullets. We want you to die and rot in hell only rhetorically."

No, what Palin actually said was this:

Sarah Palin issues statement on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords shooting

What she probably meant to say was this:When I showed Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in a gun sight, I meant it metaphorically. But if real Americans exercise their right to bear and fire guns, that's okay too. Anyone who isn't carrying a concealed weapon runs the risk of getting shot.Hilarious that Palin took the offending graphic down immediately but there's supposedly nothing wrong with it. The hypocritical party of "taking personal responsibility" strikes again.



For more on Palin's hatemongering, see Racist Rhetoric Fuels Hate Crimes and Palin:  Racism Is a Ploy.

Palin: Racism is a ploy

Palin's Dangerous Race Game

In her new book, the former Alaska governor questions the patriotism of African Americans who point out the country's imperfections.

By David KaufmanHer most unflinching comments ... center on race--specifically, the racial dynamics surrounding the Obama presidency and the increasing suspicion by many progressives that Palin, the Tea Partiers and the entire anti-Obama establishment are motivated by racism.

Palin clearly thinks not. In fact, on Planet Palin, racism essentially does not exist but is merely a misanthropic by-product of African Americans' refusal to shut up, toughen up and truly become American patriots. This question of patriotism versus racism has been tackled by both white and black leaders since before the Civil War.

Back then, Frederick Douglass rightfully asked, "What to the American slave is your Fourth of July?" during his legendary Independence Day speech of 1852. More than 150 years later, Douglass' desire to rectify the triumphs of American history with the tragedies of African-American history still resonate for many descendants of his enslaved brethren.

Yet in the prose of Palin, any race-based frustration expressed by African Americans is proof positive of dubious patriotism and questionable allegiance. Racism is a ploy, a canard, a smoke screen by "opponents of this new American awakening" to impede intellectual debate and castigate conservatives as "evil … [and] just bad people."

The real "bad people," however, are Palin's anti-patriots, such as First Lady Michelle Obama, whose now infamous 2008 quote, "For the first time in my adult lifetime, I'm really proud of my country," is resurrected yet again in America by Heart. This is Palin's "Gotcha!" moment, confirmation that the Obamas "think America--at least America as it currently exists--is a fundamentally unjust and unequal country."

I suspect that this thought may have crossed the minds of both Obamas--much as it has millions of Americans of every color, every day. Indeed, at a time when increasing poverty on Main Street contrasts with stratospheric salaries on Wall Street, how could it not? And why not?

Demanding justice by refuting the status quo has been a hallmark of American politics ever since those original Tea Partiers were polluting Boston Harbor. Acknowledging fundamental injustices and inequalities has been the first step in every American civil rights movement--from ending slavery and enshrining women's suffrage to establishing worker-protection laws, as well as current efforts to repeal "Don't ask, don't tell."Comment:  Needless to say, Palin's insinuations about blacks apply to Indians and other minorities too.

This is a continuation of Palin's attempt to paint white voters as "real Americans" and minority voters as something else. With rhetoric like that going unchallenged by other Republicans, it's no wonder so many conservatives think Obama is a Kenyan and a Muslim. They believe Palin because she's one of them; they don't know or care that she's a liar.

For more on the asinine claim that racism no longer exists, see Talking About Race Perpetuates Racism?, White Conservatives "Angry About Racism," and Mentioning Race = Dwelling on Past?

For more on Palin's attempts to marginalize minorities, see Palin's "Real America" vs. America and "Real America" = White? For other conservative attempts to marginalize minorities, see:

Obama smeared as Luo tribesman
Beck:  God ordered Indians killed
Ron Hart is a racist
Sherrod incident shows conservative tactics
Tea Party leader posts racist "satire"
New Hampshire Republican = racist
Didier:  Stop protecting the weak
Arizona's laws = manifest insanity
Rand Paul's pro-racist libertarianism

Book Burners for Christ

The recent controversy over Pastor Terry Jones's plan to burn a Qur'an (Koran) prompted this series of postings on Facebook:

In a bold move, Obama actually comes out against something:

Obama:  Koran Burning 'Stunt' Could 'Greatly Endanger' Troops

And:

We Didn't Start the Fire

You aren't responsible for Quran burners. Don't hold Muslims responsible for 9/11.

By William Saletan"He represents only 30 people in this town," the pastor tells the New York Times. "It needs to get out somehow to the rest of the world that this isn't the face of Christianity."

It will, Reverend. Right after it gets out to the rest of the world that we don't think the 9/11 hijackers are the face of Islam.And:This is how it feels to be judged by the sins of others who destroy in the name of your faith. You're no more responsible for 30 Christian extremists in Florida than Muslims are for the 19 hijackers of 9/11. Yet most of us, when polled, say that no Muslim house of worship should be built near the site of the 9/11 attacks. In saying this, we implicitly hold all Muslims accountable for the crime of those 19 people.

Now you know how it feels to be judged that way. It's inaccurate, and it's wrong.

Let the snark begin!

Book-burner Terry Jones is the Ayatollah Khomeini of pastors. Rock 'n' rolla with America's ayatollah!

Ayatollah Jones:  "Islam is the religion of hate and Christianity is the religion of love, so I'm gonna destroy the very thing Muslims hold most dear. That'll show 'em."

Obama comes out against book burning. In a surprising twist, 10,000 conservatives now say they favor book burning. "Since Obama is a Muslim terrorist," they said, "Pastor Jones must be doing something right."

‎"Book burning is the new tea party," said professional windbag Rush Limbaugh. "America has a long tradition of book burning," proclaimed professional adulterer Newt Gingrich. Professional crybaby Glenn Beck announced he would hold a rally entitled "Book Burners for Christ." "Refudiate whichever side Obama is 4," professional quitter Sarah Palin tweeted to her cult members.

Book Burners for Christ recently announced their first targets: Biology textbooks that promote sex and evolution, President Obama's alleged "birth certificate," and several sections of the US Constitution.

The controversy ends (?)

Alas, Ayatollah Jones chickened out and crawled back under his rock. I guess his faith wasn't quite as strong as that of his foes. "Follow my way," I think Jesus said in the Bible, "unless it causes too much negative publicity."

Florida pastor calls off Quran burning

"Yay for quitters!" Sarah Palin tweeted to her followers. "If I ever finished a book, I'd burn it too!"

Glenn Beck immediately announced that he would retitle his "Book Burners for Christ" rally. Now he's calling it "Restoring Courage for Christian Cowards."



In related news, the Ku Klux Klan is threatening to sue Ayatollah Jones, Glenn Beck, and Book Burners for Christ. "Burning things in the name of Christ is our thing, not theirs," said the Grand Dragon, who added that he supports neo-Nazis, Christian militias, and the Tea Party movement.

Meanwhile, having failed to ignite a worldwide conflagration, the "pastor" is seeking to trademark the name "Ayatollah Jones" and shop it to Hollywood. Jones's agent says Jones envisions a whole series of Christian-themed movies starring him as a globe-trotting adventurer. Unlike archaeologist Indiana Jones, however, Ayatollah Jones will burn the holy texts and destroy the holy sites of each Satanic culture he visits.

"First we'll take out the Muslims," said Jones in a prepared statement. "Then the Jews and other heathens." Studio executives say Ayatollah Jones has the potential to rival The Passion of the Christ as a hit among conservative Christians. Jones's agent is already touting Mel Gibson to play the book-burning barnstormer.

On a serious note

It would be interesting to analyze what role social media played in this controversy. I mean, think of the negative publicity this stunt received.

In the old media, a dozen major media outlets might've covered it. In the new media, a dozen major media outlets covered it...and millions of people shared the news with each other. I wouldn't be surprised if social media was the dominant force in causing the groundswell of opposition.

For more on the subject, see Conservative Bigotry Against Islam and Conservative Rallies = White Self-Pity.

Below:  Mel Gibson as Ayatollah Jones.

Religious freedom for everyone, except Indians

Another essay on the proposed mosque near Ground Zero makes a startling claim:

Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich Need a History Lesson

By Joe ConasonUntil now, nobody in a position of responsibility has sought to deny basic religious liberty to any group whose practices did not somehow trespass the law. Despite disagreements around the borders of religious freedom, the nation shared a consensus in favor of the concept—for everyone, with no exceptions.

It is a consensus that dates back to the first days following the Revolution, when George Washington wrote to the Jewish congregation in Newport, R.I., guaranteeing the new republic’s commitment to universal tolerance."Everyone, with no exceptions"...really? Setting aside Muslims for the moment, I don't think it would be hard to find historical examples of religious bias against Jews, Mormons, Buddhists, Quakers, and others who didn't practice mainstream Christianity. More recent examples include those who believe in Wicca or Santeria.

Of course, the most obvious case is the American Indian. I'd say Indians had almost no religious freedom for most of their history under US rule. Christian Americans routinely shut down Native religions that were every bit as valid as theirs. They persecuted and sometimes prosecuted Indians who were sincerely following the Creator's wishes. (An example of prosecution would be jailing a Native American Church member for using peyote.)

It wasn't until the mid-20th century that Indians could practice their beliefs without fear of massive reprisal. And a bias that's only slightly less blatant continues. Sacred Native sites don't get the same protections as churches and synagogues. Prisons don't let Native inmates have medicine bags or hold sweats. We've seen how a school district tried to prevent a Native boy from wearing his hair long. Etc.

Hence the title of this posting: religious freedom for everyone, except Indians.

Except for Conason's foolishness about the lack of religious persecution, his column is good. Here's what he has to say about Gingrich's and Palin's prejudice:Although the building is to be constructed on private property, both Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin seem to believe that the state should forbid construction of a mosque there.

According to Palin, this project represents a threatened “stab” in the “heart” for every American—and that’s all she said. The former Alaska governor’s remarks frequently lack any semblance of reason or logic. This time, her fumbling diction, instructing “peace-loving” Muslims to “refudiate” the mosque, provided such amusement that the ominous subtext of the message was almost ignored—but it couldn’t have been clearer.

Beneath her references to healing and understanding, Palin let every Muslim in America know that their religion, its edifices and symbols, offends their fellow Americans. She was saying that Islam doesn’t share equal status with other faiths. She was warning the Muslim community against any assertion of those rights.

Characteristically, Gingrich went further, using aggressive language and false insinuation. Without any shred of evidence, he denounced the moderate Muslims developing the community center as “hostile to our civilization.” Instead of building where they live, in New York City, he urged them to try to build a church or a synagogue “in Saudi Arabia.”

By uttering those words, the old bully proved what liberals and moderates have often noticed about the religious right—namely, the troubling resemblance between our homegrown ultras and the foreign extremists who have attacked us. Only when the Saudis permit full religious freedom to Christians and Jews, Gingrich suggested, should we do likewise to Muslims. So he recommends that we trash the Bill of Rights and mimic the practices of foreign despots.Comment:  For more on the subject, see Opposing Churches Near Massacre Sites and Angry White Christians Want Country Back.

Below:  The face of religious intolerance in America.

Socialized medicine okay for Tripp

More Palin Hypocrisy:  Tripp Has Government Provided Health Insurance

By Shannyn MooreThe dangers of "death panels" were explained to Americans on Sarah Palin's Facebook page. Oh, sweet Lord, she must not sleep at night...her grandson could be the next victim of "socialized medicine."

Recently released documents from the custody battle show clearly Tripp Palin Johnston has socialized health care through Indian Health Services and the Alaska Native Medical Center.

Palin's family has federally funded health care afforded to them...but if you had it Barack Obama might kill you. Put this on the list of Palin's Greatest Hypocritical Hits...volume 97.Comment:  A court document (see link) says that Tripp Palin Johnston is "an enrolled tribal member of Curyung Tribal Council within the Bristol Bay Native Association consortium."

During the 2008 presidential campaign, I posted some items on whether Sarah Palin's husband Todd was an Alaska Native or not. The gist seemed to be that Todd was a shareholder of the Bristol Bay Native Association, and thus perhaps technically an Alaska Native. But he wasn't an Alaska Native in any real sense--i.e., as a participant or believer in a tribal culture.

The same presumably applies to his children and to his grandchild Tripp.

In any case, it's clear Sarah Palin is one of the biggest hypocrites and liars in contemporary politics. Remember how she was for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it? What does it say about Republicans that she's a leading contender for their next presidential nomination?

For more on the subject, see More on Todd Palin's Background and Todd Palin Not Native After All?

Palin quotes John Wooden (Legs)

Palin's Latest Rogue Gaffe

By Geoffrey DunnAs the epigram to Chapter Three, "Drill, Baby, Drill," Palin assigns the following remarks to the Hall of Fame hoops coach:

Our land is everything to us... I will tell you one of the things we remember on our land. We remember our grandfathers paid for it--with their lives.
Only the quote wasn't by John Wooden. It was written by a Native American activist named John Wooden Legs in an essay entitled "Back on the War Ponies," which appeared in a left-wing anthology, We Are the People: Voices from the Other Side of American History, edited by Nathaniel May, Clint Willis, and James W. Loewen.

Here's the full quote:

Our land is everything to us. It is the only place in the world where Cheyennes talk the Cheyenne language to each other. It is the only place where Cheyennes remember the same things together. I will tell you one of the things we remember on our land. We remember our grandfathers paid for it--with their life. My people and the Sioux defeated General Custer at the Little Big Horn.Comment:  Not only did Palin misattribute and mangle the quote, she misused it. Wooden Legs is talking about protecting the land from Americans, not protecting for Americans so they can drill it.

Of course, Palin's ghostwriter Lynn Vincent is really to blame. She's the one who has Palin quoting Plato and Aristotle as if Palin knows who they are.

For more on the subject, see Natives Call Going Rogue Fiction and The 2008 Presidential Campaign.

Below:  "I made a mistake? Who cares? Facts are for Democrats, not Republicans."

Palin to ditch Native husband?

Todd and Sarah Palin to divorce

Affairs on both sidesAlaskaReport has learned today that Todd Palin and former Alaska governor Sarah Palin are to divorce. Multiple sources in Wasilla and Anchorage (including a former Palin staffer) have confirmed the split.

A National Enquirer story exposing previous affairs on both sides led to a deterioration of their marriage and the stress from that led to Palin's resignation as governor of Alaska last week.

The Palins were noticeably not speaking to each other for most of last Sunday's resignation speech in Fairbanks. Sarah ditched Todd right after the speech and left without him. Sarah removed her wedding ring a couple of weeks ago.

Sarah has recently purchased land in Montana and is considering moving the family there. Sarah Palin is originally from Idaho.Sarah Palin Lover Revealed!In a world exclusive The NATIONAL ENQUIRER names GOP VP Candidate Sarah Palin's secret lover!

No less than three members of the man’s family including one by sworn affidavit have claimed that Sarah Palin engaged in an extramarital affair with hus­band Todd’s former business partner, Brad Hanson.

These sources have named Hanson as Palin’s secret love, and say their affair nearly wrecked both their marriages.

Hanson owned a snowmobile dealership with Palin’s husband Todd, who immediately dissolved the partnership after he heard stories about the affair, which occurred around 1996, according to the sources. At the time, Palin was mayor of Wasilla.Sarah Palin STILL not getting a divorce (in case you don’t believe it)

By Jimmy OrrRidiculous? It is. Palin is no longer the governor of Alaska and hasn’t surfaced since her resignation. Her Twitter account has remained eerily silent. She’s a ghost.

But knowing how news regarding Palin spreads like wildfire, Palin’s spokesperson Meg Stapleton posted a statement on her Facebook page denying the allegation.

“Yet again, some so-called journalists have decided to make up a story. There is no truth to the recent “story” (and story is the correct term for this type of fiction) that the Palins are divorcing,” Stapleton wrote. “The Palins remain married, committed to each other and their family, and have not purchased land in Montana (last week it was reported to be Long Island).”Comment:  Among the people who denied sex scandal until they proved to be true are Bill Clinton, John Edwards, and Mark Sanford. Denials aren't worth much as evidence these days.

Unless AlaskaReport.com made up the "multiple sources," they're the ones who "made up" the divorce claim. It remains to be seen whether the claim is true or not.

For more on the subject, see More on Todd Palin's Background and The 2008 Presidential Campaign.

Palin's "real America" vs. America

Frank Rich nails the racial subtext to the Sarah Palin phenomenon. This may explain why minorities voted for Obama in droves--because they know a defender of white privilege when they see one.

She Broke the G.O.P. and Now She Owns It[S]he stands for a genuine movement: a dwindling white nonurban America that is aflame with grievances and awash in self-pity as the country hurtles into the 21st century and leaves it behind.And:The essence of Palinism is emotional, not ideological. Yes, she is of the religious right, even if she winks literally and figuratively at her own daughter’s flagrant disregard of abstinence and marriage. But family-values politics, now more devalued than the dollar by the philandering of ostentatiously Christian Republican politicians, can only take her so far. The real wave she’s riding is a loud, resonant surge of resentment and victimization that’s larger than issues like abortion and gay civil rights.

That resentment is in part about race, of course. When Palin referred to Alaska as “a microcosm of America” during the 2008 campaign, it was in defiance of the statistical reality that her state’s tiny black and Hispanic populations are unrepresentative of her nation. She stood for the “real America,” she insisted, and the identity of the unreal America didn’t have to be stated explicitly for audiences to catch her drift. Her convention speech’s signature line was a deftly coded putdown of her presumably shiftless big-city opponent: “I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities.” (Funny how this wisdom has been forgotten by her supporters now that she has abandoned her own actual responsibilities in public office.)

The latest flashpoint for this kind of animus is the near-certain elevation to the Supreme Court of Sonia Sotomayor, whose Senate confirmation hearings arrive this week. Prominent Palinists were fast to demean Sotomayor as a dim-witted affirmative-action baby. Fred Barnes of The Weekly Standard, the Palinist hymnal, labeled Sotomayor “not the smartest” and suggested that Princeton awards academic honors on a curve. Karl Rove said, “I’m not really certain how intellectually strong she would be.” Those maligning the long and accomplished career of an Ivy League-educated judge do believe in affirmative-action—but only for white people like Palin, whom they boosted for vice president despite her minimal achievements and knowledge of policy, the written word or even geography.And:The Palinist “real America” is demographically doomed to keep shrinking. But the emotion it represents is disproportionately powerful for its numbers. It’s an anger that Palin enjoyed stoking during her “palling around with terrorists” crusade against Obama on the campaign trail. It’s an anger that’s curdled into self-martyrdom since Inauguration Day.

Its voice can be found in the postings at a Web site maintained by the fans of Mark Levin, the Obama hater who is, at this writing, the No.2 best-selling hardcover nonfiction writer in America. (Glenn Beck is No.1 in paperback nonfiction.) Politico surveyed them last week. “Bottomline, do you know of any way we can remove these idiots before this country goes down the crapper?” wrote one Levin fan. “I WILL HELP!!! Should I buy a gun?” Another called for a new American revolution, promising “there will be blood.”

These are the cries of a constituency that feels disenfranchised—by the powerful and the well-educated who gamed the housing bubble, by a news media it keeps being told is hateful, by the immigrants who have taken some of their jobs, by the African-American who has ended a white monopoly on the White House. Palin is their born avatar. She puts a happy, sexy face on ugly emotions, and she can solidify her followers’ hold on a G.O.P. that has no leaders with the guts or alternative vision to stand up to them or to her.And for those who think the "liberal" media is picking on Palin, here's a response:Certainly, the press in collective scandal mode is often an unpretty thing. But the reasons for what eventually became Palin's titanic bad press stemmed from three causes--1) her rapidly demonstrated lack of grounding or familiarity with almost every major policy question facing the country, 2) the fact--which took reporters a bit longer to get a handle on--that her governance of Alaska had amounted almost to one string of ethics violations and possibly illegal behavior. Time and again she showed a signal inability to grasp that executive power was not to be used to pursue personal vendettas or enrichment. And then 3), growing from the recognition of items #1 and #2, that Palin was simply a liar, even judged against the frightfully generous standard customarily applied to the truth-telling abilities of elected officials.Comment:  Pretty darn funny that Republicans would attack Sotomayor's intellectual abilities while defending Palin's. Hypocritical much?

Needless to say, these are the same people throwing tea parties against the first black president. They had nothing to say when Bush increased the national debt unnecessarily--the only president to do so during wartime. But they're full of mock outrage when Obama increases the national debt to counter the worst recession since the Depression.

No news here. Conservatives are hypocrites, and the sun rises in the east.

For more on the subject, see Good-Bye and Good Riddance to Palin and The 2008 Presidential Campaign.

Who lost in the election

Good, and Now Back to Work: Avoiding Both Cynicism and Overconfidence in the Age of Obama

By Tim WiseIt was a defeat for the right-wing echo chamber and its rhetorical stormtroopers, foremost among them Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck.

It was a defeat for the crazed mobs ever-present at McCain/Palin rallies, what with their venomous libels against Obama, their hate-addled brains spewing forth one after another racist and religiously chauvinistic calumny upon his head and those of his supporters.

It was a defeat for the internet rumor-pimps who insisted to all they could reach with a functioning e-mail address that Obama was not really a citizen. Or perhaps he was, but he was a Muslim, or perhaps not a Muslim, but probably a black supremacist, or maybe not that either, but surely the anti-christ, and most definitely a baby-killer.

It was a defeat for those who believed McCain and Palin would be delivered the victory by the hand of almighty God, because their theological and eschatological vacuity so regularly gets in the way of their ability to think. As such, it was a setback for the religious fascists in the far-right Christian community whose belief that God is on their side has always made them especially dangerous. Now, having lost, perhaps at least some of these will be forced to ponder what went wrong. If we’re lucky, perhaps some will suffer the kind of crisis of faith that often prefaces a complete nervous breakdown. Either way, it’s nice just to ruin their Young-Earth-Creationist-I-Have-an-Angel-on-My-Shoulder day.Comment:  Needless to say, Indians in particular and minorities in general were among the winners.

This election answered the question of who's a "real" American. The answer: those of us who voted for Obama. We're the majority, so we define who and what Americans are. If we say it's Jeremiah Wright, "socialists," homosexuals, Muslims, or Indians, then it is by definition.

If those of you in the minority don't like it, get the hell out of our country. Start your own country on a desert island somewhere. You can call it "America" and exclude whomever you want. But stop trying to divide and conquer our America with your racist, xenophobic poison.

For more on the subject, see The 2008 Presidential Campaign.

Below:  Some real Americans:



And a message from someone who doesn't deserve to be an American. (I'll bet big money that this person was a McCain/Palin supporter.)

"Real America" = white?

The 'real' America, really

America today looks less and less like the one extolled by GOP mythmakers.According to Sarah Palin, she and John McCain "believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hardworking, very patriotic, um, very, um, pro-America areas of this great nation."

Um, very, um. ... Yeah.

Palin later backed away from these remarks, but the McCain-Palin campaign's staff and surrogates--and even the guy at the top of the ticket--keep hammering the same message: Some parts of America--and some Americans--are just more authentic and "pro-America" than others.

On Saturday, for instance, McCain advisor Nancy Pfotenhauer suggested that although northern Virginia may have "gone more Democratic," "real Virginia" (the "part of the state that's more Southern in nature") will be "very responsive" to McCain. Rep. Robin Hayes (R-N.C.) joined the chorus, telling the crowd at a McCain rally, "Liberals hate real Americans that work, and accomplish, and achieve, and believe in God."

Hayes, like Palin, later forswore his remarks, but on Tuesday in western Pennsylvania--one of the few parts of the state where Barack Obama doesn't hold a clear lead--McCain worked the same theme: Western Pennsylvania "is the most God-loving, most patriotic part of America."

The GOP code isn't hard to crack: There's the America that might vote for Obama (a suspect America populated by people with liberal notions, big-city ways and, no doubt, dark skin), and then there's the "real" America, where people live in small towns, believe in God and country, and are ... well ... white.Why this neo-McCarthyism is happening:The GOP hasn't been the party of reality-based thinking for some time now. "When we act, we create our own reality," a "senior Bush advisor" (assumed to be Karl Rove) told journalist Ron Suskind in 2002, and this became the administration's version of a game plan. Thus Donald Rumsfeld's conviction--shared by McCain--that we would be "greeted as liberators" in Iraq. For GOP leaders, the Iraq that erupted into a violent insurgency just wasn't the "real" Iraq.

We're now seeing the same pathology at work in the McCain-Palin campaign. McCain and Palin look at America and see what they wish was there, rather than what's actually there: an America in which they'll be greeted as liberators and rightful heirs to the mantle of leadership. America, after all, has been led by white Anglo-Saxons for the last two-plus centuries and, for the last 40 years, mostly by Republicans. For that to change is almost unthinkable. And so Team McCain just edits out the inconvenient America that doesn't seem likely to vote GOP. That America's not real. It just can't be.

I'm not entirely without sympathy. Behind the anger and the us-versus-them rhetoric we've seen at recent McCain-Palin rallies, there's a palpable sense of dislocation and anxiety: the anxiety of those who feel that things are slipping away from them, that the world is changing too quickly and too uncomfortably. Change has come fast--and change hurts.Comment:  Needless to say, we haven't seen McCain or Palin tell Indians that their land "is the most God-loving, most patriotic part of America." We haven't seen them visit Indian reservations at all. That's because Indians in particular and Americans in general would vilify them for their divisive and racist claims.

Really, McCain. If you're such a brave war hero, go to a black church or an Indian powwow somewhere. Tell the people that they're not as God-loving or as patriotic as the people in western Pennsylvania or rural Virginia. Tell them that because they're liberal, they hate "real Americans." Tell them they live in the anti-America part of the country with the people we're supposed to loathe: terrorists, communists, socialists, intellectuals, elitists, artists, agnostics, atheists, secularists, multiculturalists, and of course Jews, blacks, and homosexuals.

No wonder you're losing so badly, you stupid old man. Your campaign is based on hypocrisy and hate and everyone realizes it except you and your diehard supporters. I hope you go down in history as the most shameful Republican since, well, George W. Bush.

For more on the subject, see The 2008 Presidential Campaign.

Palin trots out grandma

Yup'ik ties give Palins unique Alaska connection

NATIVE:  Grandmother on Todd's side calls the governor a 'special gal.'As a candidate for governor two years ago, and more recently on the national stage, Sarah Palin has avidly pointed to her husband's Eskimo heritage. Lena Andree is one-half Yup'ik, and Todd Palin is one-eighth.

The Palin children are Native, too--one-sixteenth, eligible for Indian health benefits under federal law, as lineal descendants of Native enrollees under the 1970 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.

During the 2006 governor's race, Palin introduced Andree on stage at the Alaska Federation of Natives convention and described her own family's mixed roots as an example of how whites and Natives can surmount controversies that divide them.

"I look at Alaska as a family, and I want my own family to be used as an example of how it can work," Palin told the state's biggest Native organization that year.

When it came time to debate, however, Palin was often at odds with her Native listeners. On sensitive subsistence hunting and fishing issues, her positions resembled those of urban sportsmen's groups who backed her.

In the election, she finished far behind Democrat Tony Knowles in rural, Native-dominated districts. Urban and small-town votes carried her to victory. As governor, she has come under criticism for not reaching out to Natives, though her efforts to assist rural Alaska economically have been praised.Comment:  For more on the subject, see The 2008 Presidential Campaign.

How Palin abused her power

Report:  Palin let Todd use governor's office to push firingAlaska Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power in pushing for the firing of a state trooper once married to her sister and by allowing her husband to use the governor's office in a crusade against the officer, a legislative investigation found.

"Governor Palin knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda, to wit: to get Trooper Michael Wooten fired," concluded investigator Steve Branchflower in his report made public Friday.

The governor let her husband, Todd, use the governor's office and its resources, "including access to state employees, to continue to contact subordinate state employees in an effort to find some way to get Trooper Wooten fired," Branchflower wrote.

"She had the authority and power to require Mr. Palin to cease contacting subordinates, but she failed to act," he wrote.Comment:  For more on the subject, see The 2008 Presidential Campaign.

Palin guilty in Troopergate

Palin abused her power, legislative inquiry finds

The governor's unhappiness over a trooper not being fired probably contributed to the public safety commissioner's dismissal, the report says.Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin violated ethics laws and abused her power as governor in pressing to have her former brother-in-law fired as a state trooper, an independent legislative investigation concluded today.

In a report whose release was the subject of a high-stakes political showdown that went all the way to the Alaska Supreme Court, investigator Stephen Branchflower concluded that Palin communicated her displeasure with the trooper, Mike Wooten, and allowed her husband to apply pressure to have Wooten fired.

The report also found that Palin's unhappiness that Wooten had not been fired was "a likely contributing factor" in the firing of former Commissioner of Public Safety Walt Monegan. Monegan testified that he had received repeated communications from Palin and her husband over Wooten.Comment:  So much for McCain's "vetting" of his VP choice. And for his claims that he's the "reform" candidate who will clean up the Republican culture of corruption.

For more on the subject, see Troopergate:  Native Pressured Native.

More on Todd Palin's background

Todd Palin and his heritage, the "Series of Tubes" looks at both the PalinsAlthough he is a shareholder of the Bristol Bay Native Corporation, all you need to be a shareholder is to inherit the shares (which he could have gotten from his grandmother or mother.)

What hasn't been mentioned is whether he is an enrolled member of a tribe. There are more stringent blood quantum requirements for some tribes. That they haven't said, "And a member of X tribe... or X village tribal organization..." is pretty telling.

What keeps being mentioned is that he is a descendant of a Yup'ik woman (his mother.) I didn't connect with why this kept coming up in American Indian (Lower 48) commentary until I realized that, as Alaska Native people, this is a very common term because of the corporations. For many services or memberships, you can either be an "original shareholder" or a "descendant." If you were not 1/4 blood quantum Alaska Native in December of 1971 or before, you could not be an original shareholder--which is why, though I have more than the required blood quantum, because I was not born earlier, I am not an original shareholder. I am a "descendant." The frequent mention of his mother and of his being a descendant tells me that he is used to signing on as a descendant, not an original enrollee, which means that, despite him being born before 1971, he was not 1/4 or more Yup'ik.

To be very clear--I absolutely do not believe that blood quantum defines how "Native" you are. The frequent mention of it as a disqualifying factor is wrong. For that matter, there are countless ways to be a proud member of the Native community, and none of it has to do with that extra 1/16 more Native blood you have than the next guy over. What defines you as a Native leader, and a Native example, is much easier to nail down, and in this case, Todd would not be the definition of either.

He has also never been part of the Southcentral Alaska Native culture, nor have his children, despite being raised here. To me, this says he is either disinterested, or because he is limited in a few of the organizations (namely tribal) he is rejecting the whole. In any case, both the Palins have a dismal record on Native issues, so please, do not look to Todd's heritage to help with them. That he hasn't done anything because of it so far is a good indicator that he won't be encouraging his wife on anything in the future.Comment:  For more on the subject, see Todd Palin Not Native After All?

Alaskans say no to Palin

From a MySpace bulletin posted by C-Lock, 9/18/08:Alaska Women Reject Palin Rally

The Alaska Women Reject Palin rally was significantly bigger than Palin's rally that got all the national media coverage!

So take heart, sit back, and enjoy the photo gallery. Feel free to spread the pictures around to anyone who needs to know that Sarah Palin most definitely does not speak for all Alaskans. The citizens of Alaska, who know her best, have things to say.The bulletin includes photos of the event. The slogans on the signs are worth noting:Voted for Her Once: Never Again

Reckless/Inexperienced  [i.e., McCain/Palin]

Hockey Mama for Obama

Hey!!! Hockey Mom! Keep the Puck Out of D.C.!

McPain/Failin'

Great Performance, S.P.
But We're Not That Stupid

Bush in a Skirt

Palin Drilling to Nowhere

Polar Bear Moms Say: No Palin!

Vote Issues Not Gender! "No" to McCain/Palin

Pro-Woman
Anti-Palin
(Beware of Tricksters)  [spoken by a raven--a Native influence]

Elect Obama/Biden
Keep Palin to AK
Retire McCain (to live in one of his 7 houses)

The Alaska Disasta'

Like the Palin Kool-Aid?

"God's Will" Is Not a Foreign Policy!!Comment:  For more on the subject, see Sarah Palin's White Privilege.

Racist and sexist Palin?

Alaskans Speak (In A Frightened Whisper):  Palin Is “Racist, Sexist, Vindictive, And Mean”“So Sambo beat the bitch!”

This is how Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin described Barack Obama’s win over Hillary Clinton to political colleagues in a restaurant a few days after Obama locked up the Democratic Party presidential nomination.

According to Lucille, the waitress serving her table at the time and who asked that her last name not be used, Gov. Palin was eating lunch with five or six people when the subject of the Democrat’s primary battle came up. The governor, seemingly not caring that people at nearby tables would likely hear her, uttered the slur and then laughed loudly as her meal mates joined in appreciatively.

“It was kind of disgusting,” Lucille, who is part Aboriginal, said in a phone interview after admitting that she is frightened of being discovered telling folks in the “lower 48” about life near the North Pole.

Then, almost with a sigh, she added, “But that’s just Alaska.”

Racial and ethnic slurs may be “just Alaska” and, clearly, they are common, everyday chatter for Palin.

Besides insulting Obama with a Step-N’-Fetch-It, “darkie musical” swipe, people who know her say she refers regularly to Alaska’s Aboriginal people as “Arctic Arabs”--how efficient, lumping two apparently undesirable groups into one ugly description--as well as the more colourful “mukluks” along with the totally unimaginative “f**king Eskimos,” according to a number of Alaskans and Wasillians interviewed for this article.Comment:  At Newspaper Rock, we don't whisper people's racist and sexist remarks. We shout them so people can see and hear their ugliness.

In other words, if it looks like a pig and sounds like a pig, it probably is a pig. Even if it's wearing lipstick.

It seems Palin is a typical American in yet another way. She's prejudiced against the Natives she supposedly appreciates.

For more on the subject, see Palin Attacks Native Values.

Below:  "Those f**king Eskimos are calling me mean and vindictive! Send those Arctic Arabs back where they came from!"