People! This is going to be good!
Look, if they are THAT SERIOUS about NOT taking back this story, they must have SOME PRETTY GOOD EVIDENCE!

LOL ::keeping fingers crossed::

Thom Hartmann talked about the Enquirer story too. They have only been sued successfully once and Carol Burnett won. He actually said they are one of the last investigative bastions of journalism in this country.

I hope they stick to their guns and publish it. This right wing wacko needs to be shoved out!

I don't know, let her stay for awhile. That way we can the slow death of a modern campaign. That steady drip, drip, drip of blood from a twitching carcass.

I agree, totally.

She should stay until just before the election...too close to put in a credible replacement...not that she's credible.
I want to see Biden wipe the floor with her in their debate. I want her ignorance and corruption to be made apparent to everyone watching.
And then, just for good measure, the Enquirer story should be confirmed just about 2 weeks to 10 days before the Big Day.

I hope this story is true. Not because it would be yet another example of Palin's hypocrisy, but because I want to see how the Republicans will try to convince us that adultery is a good thing. Smurfette Palin or whatever her name is being pregnant at 17 and unmarried is a good thing, according to them. Adultery must be, too.

I concur about the timing, wait until a month before the election and then slam her. Leave them stuttering and stammering all over the TV, and frantically looking for a replacement. That's when they'll go with Liarman, and lose all the support from the righties.

The repugs are drinking their own Koolaid and are now seeing chem trails. The right wing zealouts will be jumping off of cliffs.

Prediction (if it's true):

Same defense as for "Briss". Yes, had an affair, husband knew of it, she admits it. He forgives her. She's only human. Love abounds in the family unit. Has the child, pro-life. Just like so many other families. Love the sinner, hate the sin. Hallelujah.

This is what I think. The conservative brain is unable to process information in a normal manner due to the recessive gene that prevents emotional moderation of the limbic system by the cortex. They exhibit what George Orwell called DOUBLETHINK in the novel 1984.

It's not because conservatives are unwilling to recognize reality, but that they are gentically unable to separate fantasy and reality. Because 75% of the population is homozygous for the gene, that majority has no appreciation for how they "think."

Adam, That explains why I, as an adopted child, am a dem, and my parents are repigs. I come from a good gene pool, they do not.

We are talking about the "National Enquirer".. you know.. UFO, Alien Abduction, anal probing, girl with three heads, etc... That Fox News turned into "legitimate" press by taking on the John Edward's story that the Enquirer carried.

Here's the real question: Will "fair and balanced" also run with the "Palin Affair"? or are they really just hypocrites? (ok, not so "real" question.)

faux will report it at 2:33 am once on a sunday morning...

the cons who like palin cant not vote for the ticket, they dont care about her

they care about rewriting the constitution to reflect their sick religious agenda, they care about eliminating the federal govt other than defense of which they will steal all the money, they care about making sure gay people have a miserable existence in this country...

they care about these issues

I know exactly what you mean. On my adoptive mother's side, I only really get along with one cousin, and her mom was an "out of wedlock birth" to one of the patriarchs of the family -- Army man, Army chaplain, 3rd generation pastor, etc. She and her mom were absolutely SHUNNED for years until my mother, of all people, stood up to the rest of the family and told them to knock off the discrimination.

But we tease each other all the time -- I look like my mother's side and was perhaps likely adopted into that family as someone else's kid so she pokes fun at me. Then again, I get to say, hey, you're the one actually related to them by blood and I'm not so you just shut up. lol

And so it goes.

NOBODY knows the disastrous extent of "family secrets" like adoptees and our theoretical cousins, borrowed children, foster kids, and aborted fetuses.

I've been ready for a REAL national conversation on this topic for 40 years, and hope maybe this situation is just the one to start it.

A bit off topic maybe for a sec, but...

You're not 40 yet, are you?

Wow.

Just barely (July), yeah.

Back on topic...

I'm the child of both parents being Depression matured, FDR lifelong Democrats.

Must be why for only fleeting moments occurring VERY rarely in my life have I ever even mildly questioned my own liberalism/progressivism.

Must be SOMETHING to this genetic stuff...

Because out of 4 brothers, only 1 (adam's 25%) is firmly in the regressive camp.




(Also...the youngest is gay and fits in with the male birth order thing too, but that's a whole other subject. We do have enjoyable times discussing all this genetic stuff though, lol).

Damn.

Time flies.

Very appropriate, your Sarah Palin watch sig.

Edit to add: Belated Happy Birthday if I missed it!!!!

Though I don't read it, they aren't as bad as the Weekly World News. The Enquirer WAS completely correct on John Edwards. So maybe they have hit another home run?

Not true. As recently as 2006, Kate Hudson won libel damages and an apology from them.
http://www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00004534.html

It's probably fair to say celebrities have lost more suits against the Enquirer than they have won -- reason being they are very good at using a weasel way of writing that when confronted in court allow them to say they were only "alleging" or "speculating" X or Y plus they hide behind the usual excuse that they simply believed a rumor to be true without knowing it to be false, etc. (to prove libel you have to show the other party knowingly printed false accusations about you) -- interestingly because Britain has tougher libel laws than ours, celebrities sometimes sue the British edition in British court because they stand a better chance of winning there.

BTW, I repeat: for all defenders of the National Enquirer here, do you believe the stories they have printed about Obama's affairs and marital problems this year are true? Should we defend the Globe's publication of Larry Sinclair as a credible source?

I hope that the Democrats are banking on this? They have to come up with a solid strategy to defuse the "wow factor" on Sarah. Can Joe Biden wear a cute dress? (we can just call that idea "out".)

To say nothing of how many were never filed because legal advisers informed them how incredibly difficult and expensive it is to prove "intent," and to keep up the fight throughout literally years of litigation.