Palin 'favorites' photo that claims Obama is a 'Taliban Muslim'
By Emi Kolawole
(Correction: An earlier version of this post incorrectly reported that Sarah Palin had retweeted a posting by Ann Coulter. Palin had starred the posting, which marks it as a "favorite.")
Updated 11/5/2010 10:39 a.m.
Palin wrote to Jake Tapper of ABC News to counter the allegation that the favoriting of the Ann Coulter tweet was on purpose:
"Jake [Tapper], I've never purposefully 'favorited' any Tweet. I had to go back to my BlackBerry to even see if such a function was possible. I was traveling to Alaska that day...it was an obvious accidental 'favoriting,' but no one can mistake that Ann Coulter was obviously being tongue in cheek with that Tweet. Shall I correct this with whichever wonderful media outlet ran with this (an obviously bored reporter...since there must be nothing going on in the world today, like, um, ramifications of a shake up of power in the U.S. House of Representatives?)."
Updated 9:32 p.m.
Sarah Palin has used her Twitter account for a variety of things, including endorsements of key candidates during the 2010 midterm elections. But, and stay with us here, Palin's account features a retweet of an Ann Coulter tweet that links to this image:
Coulter's tweet, which is listed among Palin's "favorites," introduces the photo with the phrase, "MY NEW CHURCH!" The photo is of "The Blood of Jesus ATLAH World Missionary Church," and the text on the sign reads, "The blood of Jesus against Obama History made 4 Nov 2008 a Taliban Muslim illegally elected president USA: Hussein." The New York City-based church is led by James David Manning.
Whether Palin retweeted "favorited" the Coulter tweet personally is unclear, but SarahPAC staffer Rebecca Mansour insisted to a reporter this summer that "anything that goes out under [Palin's] name is hers."
Most disturbing results of election 2010
“In one of Tuesday's most disturbing election results, the losing candidates didn't even have opponents.
Three justices of the Iowa Supreme Court lost what is ordinarily a pro forma election to retain their seats. Not coincidentally, these justices were part of last year's unanimous ruling to strike down a state law defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Outside groups opposed to same-sex marriage, including the National Organization for Marriage and the American Family Association, poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into television ads and other efforts to deny them a new term.
"Activist judges on Iowa's Supreme Court have become political, ignoring the will of voters and imposing same-sex marriage on Iowa," said one commercial. "Liberal, out-of-control judges ignoring our traditional values and legislating from the bench.... Send them a message. Vote no on retention of Supreme Court justices."
Well, message sent -- and that is the problem. The Iowa vote is part of a larger phenomenon of the increasing politicization of judicial elections: more money, more attack ads, more intervention by outside groups, from trial lawyers to business interests…”
The idiot Prom Queen has once more forgotten that what she offers up on the internet can be found by people who are not among her mindless minions. She may not recall what she was offered to read during her days as a student. She should recall that using the internet to evade notice or to spread racist humor does not work all that well. She seems to have forgotten that another internet adventure resulted in unwanted information about her and her family becoming common knowledge. Accidentally “favorite?” It is more likely that she would accidentally read a newspaper article.
Unfortunately, the people who send her money and who would vote for her, are all too willing to believe anything published in attempting to demolish Obama’s Presidency.
Someone with a twitter account should remind her that politics will result in her becoming fat, ugly, and losing her hair. If she spreads poison, she should be offered some.
The judicial vote in Iowa is very troubling. Judges are supposed to be removed from the political scene in order to allow them to worry about the validity of their ruling rather than an election campaign. The GOP has long screamed about judicial activism. They were amazingly quiet when the Supreme Court acted in behalf of George W. Bush over Al Gore. They said little when the Roberts court decided to allow corporations personhood and limitless campaign contributions. I guess the difference is that I expect judges to rule on the merits of the case, not the depth of lobbyists’ pockets.
It’s rainy and misty here today. Lots of leaves falling, sky is gray with low-lying, heavy clouds that obscured the higher peaks this morning. We may very well have our first measurable snow fall tonight.
I replaced all the batteries in my weather station Wednesday while it was still reasonably warm and not rainy. The tiny little watch-sized screws that have to be backed out and then returned to place are impossible to handle with cold fingers. All the sensors are feeding data accurately and correctly. The latest revision of software is somewhat reluctant to mesh with Win7 and the on/off status of a notebook. I’ll get it ironed out sooner or later.