Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Today we have photo proof: Sarah Palin lied about her pregnancy (Atlantic magazine)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:04 AM
Original message
Today we have photo proof: Sarah Palin lied about her pregnancy (Atlantic magazine)
Andrew Sullivan doesn't come right out and say it:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/20...

but these two bloggers did in September, with excellent points:

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/tundra-talk/1-talk-of-the...

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=9539


What a disgusting human being she is, to have used her own daughter's first pregnancy to gain political points--and lie about it.

I hope she wins the GOP nomination in 2012. She fits right in with Cheney and the Chimp.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
1. Has Bristol had her baby yet? When is it due?
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 11:15 AM by JDPriestly
I thought Bristol was going to get married in November 2008. We are in December now. What happened there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. What happened? Her mom lost.
So she couldn't sic the Secret Service on the daddy (who doesn't want kids, just sex with Bristol).

I'm guessing she's due in late January/early February, if the 4 1/2 months figure is accurate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
faithfulcitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. I thought she was getting married next summer, but the baby should be due anytime now. hmmm...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rainbow4321 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #5
85. Odd story about Levi's ring finger tattoo
Believe I read it over at mudflats website...the reason he has Bristol's name on his ring finger is because he LOST **his** ring while hunting...so he got her name tattooed on his finger to take the place of the ring.

Ok, so we know that Bristol was sporting a ring on HER "ring finger" the day that Palin was first introduced as VP...it was one of the pics that made bloggers go "hmmmm". The assumption was it was an engagement ring. Could it have been a "marriage" ring??
Why would Levi already have a ring if they have not been married yet?

If Trig IS actually their baby, there may very well have already been a shotgun marriage so the baby would not be born out of wedlock.

Levi's sister's myspace also made reference to Sarah as being "mommy in law" and Bristol being "sister in law". Trig didn't look older than MAYBE a week old in the pics so this would have been the end of April.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
49. Oh, come on now. Don't pretend to be surprised they didn't get married.
That would have been a long shot even if McCain Palin had won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
but siriusly folks Donating Member (13 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #1
129. I thought that Bristol was due this month...
Guess we'll see when that baby shows (are people suggesting that she's not pregnant now?)...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tangerine LaBamba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:20 AM
Response to Original message
3. The stonewall has worked
The press let Palin off the hook when he didn't release her medical records until dropping a few pages of summaries on them the day before the election. They let her go, and now there is no way anyone is ever going to be able to disprove her story.

Personally, I have my own theory which DU have advised me never to post here, but I think that baby could be the result of an incestuous relationship between Bristol and Tawd. That surely would increase the possibility of a Down Syndrome baby.

That would also explain Bristol's "mono" in high school - who transfers a sick kid to a new school and then pulls her out?

Bristol's public pregnancy doesn't surprise me at all. The girl knows how to do one thing and one thing only - submit to a male. Where is she? Nowhere to be seen, and Levi dropped out of high school and is working on the North Slope.

I wonder who the real father of this baby is.

I know - I'm terrible even to think of it, but it seems obvious to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #3
61. Incest does NOT increase the likelihood of developing Down Syndrome.
That's ridiculous.

Sarah Palin does not appear to have been pregnant last winter and spring, so it seems likely that Trig is her daughter's child, but there is no reason whatsoever to think that incest was involved.

Down Syndrome is rare but not unheard of among teen pregnancies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonAnn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #61
72. Unless both parents have genetic traits for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #72
81. Um, no. Completely and totally wrong.
Genetic traits for DS? Don't exist. It is a completely random event. You're thinking of syndromes that have a genetic connection like Thalessemia or Sickle Cell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #81
83. Actually, there is a genetic risk when a young mother gives birth to a DS baby.
This happened to a friend of mine when she was in her twenties. She was told that in the case of young mothers, there was a genetic risk, and that she had a 25% chance of having another DS baby.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 06:18 AM
Response to Reply #83
100. only partially correct.
The person I was responding indicated a genetic predisposition on the part of both parents would result in DS. The chances of having another DS child are only increased if the chromosomal abnormality came from the mother, not the father. Most people do not have that test done, for obvious reasons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #81
107. Yes, but the fact that it is a completely random event also means that this whole...
line of argument that the DS indicates anything about the parents being older is bunk too.

The fact that Trig has DS means nothing. While it is less likely in a younger mother, it is entirely possible and the difference in chances of it in younger vs older women is not so huge that it should be used as an excuse to dismiss other evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #107
111. The reason that older mothers have an increased risk
is due to the age of the eggs and the propensity for chromosomal abnormalities.

Statistically, more DS babies are born to younger mothers because they are not routinely offered genetic testing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #111
113. Yeah but my point is that Trig's DS really has no bearing on the question of who the mom is
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #113
114. Actually, it might.
Why would a vehement pro-lifer like Palin risk losing the pregnancy to an amnio? She clearly didn't ever intend to abort, so why do it?

IMHO, the adoptive parents Bristol lined up backed out when the report came back that they baby had DS and they had to scramble for a suitable story that the press would believe plausible.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #114
115. Interesting angle I hadn't considered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #115
117. I had one with my son.
The AFP test came back indicating that he might have DS. I had had my oldest via C-section and wanted to avoid a second one because anesthesia and I are not a good mix.

So, I had the amnio to see, essentially, if the fetus was healthy enough, (in other words, no heart anomalies, should he have DS) to have a VBAC, because otherwise, I would suck it up and have the section.

He did not, but I was very worried that I would lose the baby as a result of the amnio. With the youngest, I had the same concerns because of an abnormality in her heart beat during a routine check-up, plus I would be 38 at EDC.

I had the super duper ultrasound with her because I didn't want to go through all that worry again.


If you never had any intention of aborting should the baby be ill, and you didn't have a previous history like mine, why risk it? It just doesn't make any sense to me.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #117
123. I agree. No pro-life person would ever risk an amnio. Did Palin announce that Trig was DS before?
If Palin announced that the baby had DS before he was born, it means that an amnio was done, and that raises the question of why?

But the angle I hadn't considered was adoption. You're thinking that Bristol was going to give up her baby for adoption, and the adoptive family asked for the amnio and backed out when they learned the baby had DS. That meant that a little baby would be joining the Palin family, and so Sarah stepped in and "became" pregnant.

An old, old story. There is nothing unusual about the Grandma claiming to be the baby's mother. There are always rumors, but most people are kind and don't make a big deal out of it.

But then Sarah accepted the VP nomination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #123
127. I'm pretty sure she knew that he had DS before he was born.
It was a story in LBN, IIRC, when he was born about how wonderfully pro-life they were.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #127
130. That alone is very telling. I agree with you. Why would a pro-life woman have amnio?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #130
132. Here's the thread from LBN. She knew.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kalyke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #130
152. You don't have to have amnio, now, to determine that.
They do nuchal fold and nose testing.

The test the folds behind the back of the neck and check to see if the baby has a profile.

http://www.babycenter.com/0_nuchal-translucency-screeni...

I had it done because I was 36/37 when I was pregant with my last child.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #152
153. The article in LBN leads one to conclude that the testing
was either amnio or CVS. Primarily because the testing you are indicating is not definitive. It can suggest DS, but not definitively dx it, therefore, it is not proof positive.

Had the doctor indicated that the baby 'might have DS', we could conclude that she had the US testing indicated. He indicated that the baby HAD DS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #123
148. I think you've figured out exactly what happened!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alcibiades Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #114
136. I agree with you on the amneo
Lots of women have it done, but we chose not to with our two kids (age 4 and 11 weeks). I have a brother with Downs, but was told this wasn't a risk factor for us. They said there's something like a 1 in 100 chance of hurting the baby, but the abnormalities they screen for are less than 1 in 100. With the improvements in other, non-invasive screenings, it seems not worth the risk, unless you have other risk factors. We're not "pro-life" per se, but would have kept our babies even if they were not perfect, unless it was something really, really bad.

I agree with your analysis. What's amazing is that the press thought it plausible.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #107
116. I agree. Trig's being a DS baby does not "prove" that Sarah is the mother.
Young women can and do have babies with DS.

Also, we only have Palin's word for the fact that Trig has DS. Yes, he "looks" like he has DS, but could he have Fetal Alcohol Syndrome instead?

We don't know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #116
119. Not to Frist him, but he has pretty significant epicanthic folds
Edited on Sat Dec-06-08 11:27 AM by Midlodemocrat
which would indicate DS. And, if he did indeed have FAS or FAE instead, when he started school, it would be pretty obvious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northernlights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #119
124. ah, but pathological liars...
tend not to worry about details like that. They just make up more lies as the old ones start to unravel...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Geek_Girl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #81
110. Actually women in their 40's are at risk of having a down syndrome baby
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #110
112. Actually, that is incorrect. As a woman passes the age of 35
the chances of her having a baby with DS increase. However, they are routinely offered genetic testing once their EDC is diagnosed and they are past 35 when it is to occur.

At that point, with a dx of AMA, they are generally offered the chance for genetic testing. Younger women are not, therefore, most babies today with DS are being born to younger women.

Sarah Palin's pro-life stance belies her even having an amnio. The action itself has caused many pregnancy losses, which women are well advised about when the choose to have one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #72
158. The only people who have "genetic traits" (sic) for Down Syndrome
Edited on Sat Dec-06-08 01:56 PM by quantessd
are people with Down Syndrome.

Down Syndrome is an extra 21st chromosome. Instead of having the normal 2 copies of chromosome #21, (one copy from each parent), Someone with Down Syndrome has 3 copies of chromosome #21.

Either the sperm or the egg had an extra chromosome. Older mothers are more likely to have an abnormal chromosome count than men or younger women. Very young women also have a higher risk of having a baby wih Down Syndrome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
87. your theory is based on complete ignorance. You could have at least researched it first
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #3
98. Wow, I'm almost speechless
'Personally, I have my own theory which DU have advised me never to post here'

Perhaps you should have listened.

Your theory serves no purpose other than to be ugly and cruel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CottonBear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
4. I don't think she lied about the pregnancy
I'm due to have a baby in a little over two weeks and could easily hide my baby bump with winter clothes, large blazers, scarves and loose tops. I've only gained a little under 20 pounds at 37 weeks. I think that she looks pregnant in the photo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. I might agree with you, but...
the ten points the other blogger makes has Occam's Razor all over it. Palin's behavior is inexcusable and horrendous if she were in fact the mother. But her behavior is entirely believable, even understandable, if Bristol is the mother.

Initially, that is--what Christian/abstinence governor wants to admit publicly that her daughter was having sex at 15 or 16?

But to then use that same birth to gain political points is disgusting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tnlefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #4
16. Congrats
and good luck. :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Native Donating Member (885 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #4
32. did you scroll down in the article to see a close up of the photo?
- completely flat stomach.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tblue37 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #32
68. And compared to a photo of one of her earlier pregnancies--
in which she looks huge, like a beached whale.





That second "baby bump" (mountain is more like it!) could not have been hidden beneath a knit shirt and coat like the one in the first pic--nor could she have leaned forward the way she is doing in the first pic. Remember, the first pic is from just 3 weeks before Trig was born.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juno jones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #68
76. What stands out to me is the waistline
in the first pic. It falls toward the middle of the waist. Those clothes she's wearing are pretty snug, if you look at the pants (I know, eww). From my own pregnancies, and those I've observed, the shirt would be strectched a bit tighter (at least!) and the crinkle showing the waistline would fall lower to the lap.

Also check out the big shirt at the bottom, then look at the short fall on the knit top above. Pregnant women usually minimize by wearing big shirts, that shirt in the upper pic would fall halfway up her belly.

IMHO, she is not preggers in the upper pic, certainly not close to giving birth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gollygee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #4
38. I'm 7 months and I've gained 6 pounds and I look way bigger than she does
and I'm unable to hide it under anything. And I'm really tall so I don't show as much as a lot of women. Is this your first baby? I didn't show nearly as much with #1, which is really common because your abdominal muscles are stronger in the first pregnancy. But with subsequent pregnancies, it's incredibly unlikely, especially when you see other photos of her late in other pregnancies, where she showed like most women.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #38
50. No one knew I was pregnant with my first. With Bianca, they guessed.
After that, there was no question. And that's generally how it goes for a lot of us. But none of us could have hidden a fifth kid. It just doesn't work that way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #4
62. But Palin looked much, much larger during her previous four pregnancies.
Trig is supposedly Palin's fifth baby, and she looked very large during a previous pregnancy (see photo at link).

I was thin during my first pregnancy but during my second I showed much earlier and gained a lot more weight. Generally women get larger with each subsequent pregnancy. The muscles stretch out.

I can't see how Palin could have been so large and gained so much weight during her previous pregnancies and then suddenly had a fifth pregnancy in which she didn't look pregnant at all until she was in her final weeks. That seems very unlikely to me. Added to the fishy details of her labor and delivery with Trig; the fact that daughter Bristol was taken out of school "for mono" during most of last year; the fact that Bristol is now claimed to be pregnant but we haven't seen her or heard anything about her pregnancy in moths; and the fact that Bristol looked just as much like a recent mother who was breastfeeding as she looked pregnant last fall - I'm suspicious.

It doesn't really matter one way or the other except that if Palin made this up, it's a pretty big whopper of a lie and she involved a lot of other people - including her family doctor - in the lie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaksavage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
6. She looks pregnant to me. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
7. I think Palin looks pregnant, but not near nine months pregnant.
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 11:24 AM by JDPriestly
I am very short and gained little weight in my second pregnancy and looked very large. Palin is taller. She appears to be pregnant to me, however, in the newly released photos, she iw wearing a black dress. Black makes a person look thinner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kevinbgoode Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #7
28. Yes...but that Bree on Desperate Housewives appeared pregnant
as well. . .even though she was covering for a daughter shipped off to have a baby that Bree passed off as her own. . .just saying. . . :-).

Besides, I'm quite sure a Republican would steal an idea off of a television comedy/drama.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
9. Gods, This Is So Stupid
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 11:29 AM by Crisco
Is everyone still too blind to see that Palin, in this photo, is the one in yellow?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. That's from a previous pregnancy, for comparison
(note the hairstyle)

This is the "8 months pregnant" photo:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #10
18. Yes, I Know
And that's why I mention it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. I don't think so.
Look, I think it's such a non-issue at this point. But, I'm pretty sure she's the woman in the red shirt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. Who is the other woman in the photo?
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 11:39 AM by wuushew
A family member or friend?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
intheflow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #9
53. That struck me, too.
I don't think the pregnant scowling woman looks like Palin with big hair and glasses, whereas the woman in yellow holds herself very much like Palin does, and seems to have the same jaw line to me. I'd be willing to believe the woman in red is her sister, though, and so in on whatever was said publicly when this photo was released.

FWIW, I don't think the woman in yellow is pregnant--ar not more than 4 or 5 months pregnant, anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
11. wait a minute
Which woman in the photo below is Palin? If I saw the heads only, I would say it is the woman on the left. And yet this photo is used to promote the contention of a very pregnant Sarah Palin.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. Palin is clearly the one in red.. different hairdo/glasses, same jawjut/facial features.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #15
22. the blonde is her sister
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #15
26. Yep, it's her.
Her face and nose are swollen from pregnancy, but the chin and mouth are definitely hers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #11
23. How Many Palin Photos Have You Ever Seen
Where her hair isn't pulled back, off of her face, at least to some extent?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #23
33. the woman in red is sarah..


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #11
58. That's Sarah on the right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
12. That Maxwrite article is excellent. I've felt since the very beginning that the bloggers
here were absolutely correct about this strange pregnancy. I think the truth will come out soon. One only wonders how they will produce a birth or baby for Bristol.

Stranger than fiction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #12
21. No need to produce one...see the 'math' post below
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #12
91. Of course we were right, but the thing is, it's no longer an issue
We used it to entice the "journalists" to do their job. When they started doing their job, our job was done. If she is pretending to be Trig's mother in order to have him covered by her medical insurance, that is, in my opinion, noble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
17. We discussed it within a day of her being named, and I watched
as the Alaska official website scrubbed all her pictures, and the slowing cherrypickled & returned some to their site..

We'll never know for sure, because the doctor is her gal-pal & unless bristol gets really pissed at her and writes a tell-all, we'll just have to do the math & suspect..but never know
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #17
20. Actually the math works out fine if Bristol were 4 1/2 months pregnant
instead of five as they claimed. If she got pregnant soon after delivering Trig (like Britney Spears' younger sister), then she'd be 4 1/2 months at the GOP convention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #20
29. Timeline: in all it's "mathiness"
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 11:59 AM by SoCalDem


School/Pregnancy timeline..Make your own conclusions
Posted by SoCalDem in General Discussion
Wed Sep 03rd 2008, 08:21 AM
There are two schools of thought here:

The Palin folks persist in using ambiguous words when it comes to dates, and Bristol's whereabouts..

Bristol left school due to mono for "a few/several months"..
Bristol left school "mid-term" of the school year..or "around" the middle of school.
She has been reported to have been "staying with her Aunt"
Sarah popped up all-of-a-sudden pregnant, after not looking or acting a bit pregnant, at "about 7 months pregnant"
Bristol has dated Levi for "about a year"
Now Bristol is "about 5 months pregnant"
Her baby is due "around Christmas"

Yet their SON joined the military on EXACTLY 9-11-07 , and will deploy on 9-11-08

There is NO ambiguity on those two patriotic days..

Word is that Bristol's pregnancy is/was NO secret in & around Wasilla...Which pregnancy? One? Both?

Last August (07) , although there were websites pushing for Palin to be vp, the Palin family was still mostly off the radar, so a teen pregnancy would have been of little consequence except for the locals, so pulling the girl from school (how 1950's of them) would have been not so unusual for Palin, due to her religious stance. Teens often do not "show" until about 4 months, so what if Bristol did not TELL Mom until then...Dec /Jan would be in the mushy middle of the school year..

An infant who weighed 6lb & change in April, a baby with Down syndrome, could also have been a baby born to a teenager , say in March (early March?), and then just tucked away until Mom's "miracle pregnancy" could be established... How do we KNOW the birth weight is accurate or even the birth date.

The ONLY REAL dates we know, are the dates when she TOLD people she was "about" 7 months pregnant (because other people substantiated that date, and there are hard-copy news sources to verify that date, and then the date she flew home, because there were people at her meeting in Texas, and people on the plane, and of course the photo in the paper the next day.

Those are the ONLY substantiated dates surrounding little Trig.

She RAN the show up there, folks.. and she's well-known to be a secretive , calculating person.

When this was all happening, she could have just been doing what SHE thought was prudent, for the baby, for her daughter.

I'm guessing that they FREAKED out when Bristol delivered a preemie baby with Down syndrome, and THAT'S when Mom concocted her "plan"..(at that time...March would be my guess).. A baby born to a 16 year old, a baby with Down syndrome would be most likely raised by Sarah & Todd anyway, so why not just "go with it".. Maybe they thought the "mono story" was working, so no harm done.

This is NOT an uncommon occurrence in close-knit, somewhat backward communities...especially with very religious communities.. As long as they reconcile this within their own tight little group, everyone keeps the secret, and just goes on with their lives..

Bristol's (now known) "tantrum" about the rushed marriage that Mom planned for her, and the fact that no one told the kids that Mom was chosen to run for vice president tells me all I need to know about this family.. They are NOT the Waltons.. These kids are props..out of the loop on most family decisions, and their input is not needed at all..

Dad's gone oil-working/fishing/snowmobiling/going to work with Sarah, and we KNOW that Sarah is a gallivanter.. Those kids raise themselves..

Which brings me to my main point.

If Trig is really Bristol's baby and she was pissed at Mom for "taking her baby" (kids could easily have an over-romanticized view, and not realize the rigors of actually raising a handicapped child), is it out of the realm of possibility that she got pregnant AGAIN, as an in-your-face gesture to Mom?

A June pregnancy would make her 4 months( about 5 months?) pregnant now, and remember Sarah only found out she would BE the veep pick LAST WEEK..

Maybe she thought the "baby-fat" on Bristol was "left over", and not a "new" one..

OR she may have known that the deception would come out now about Trig's miraculous birth, and is forcing Bristol to go along with the NEW plan, along with a shotgun wedding, and then a staged "miscarriage"..all to cover for a batch of lies cooked up months ago..because NOW those lies might come out..

Back then it was just a local thing, and not many people (outside their own little area) knew or cared ..

The whole fact that investigating or questioning this, is now being spun as sexist and overly intrusive, may be the way they pull this off..

And for people who question how this could be managed in this day and age, I say this.. Popular governor with many friends she placed in high places, combined with sympathy over the fate of a tiny little baby boy who is handicapped, can make people "forget", "overlook", "cover up".... and the baby himself, only makes her a MORE appealing/sympathetic person.

Most people these days have had someone inside their family who has faced a teen pregnancy, a baby born with health issues, or a rebellious young teen.. they have faced the hardship of being a working-mom who somehow loses control over teenagers, and many would also understand how a Mom would do almost anything to help a child/grandchild...so suspending disbelief is not hard to understand..

I think that Sarah found herself caught in a big-ole lie, and is either forcing Bristol to "go along" as payback for what Mom has done for her, by claiming Trig as her own, or Bristol is paying mom back for "taking her baby"..

We may never know for sure, but the time-line I made up shows that it's entirely possible for Bristol to be mother to BOTH babies, or that Trig is the ONLY baby, and she's being forced into another weird cover-up.....marriage/miscarriage ...because NOW Mom is on the national stage and panic has set in..

The National Enquirer is on the scene up there, but because small towns line up as "enemy vs friend", we may never really "know for sure"..

For those of us who searched immediately after the big announcement, we found many pictures online..all over the web, and especially on the Alaska State website. As soon as this started to percolate, that site was thoroughly cleansed, and now almost EVERY picture has NO EXIF data with it, and sometimes even captions have been changed. Dates for the same pictures are "all over the place", or undated.

One thing I can foresee, is that somewhere down the line, Bristol and her sisters may be in need of some serious mental health counseling.

I think this is just a plan gone VERY wrong, and they are desperately trying to work their way out of it..

Mom has backed herself into a corner, and is either grandmother to two children born to her teen daughter in a little over a year (not impossible)...or she's grandmother to one, and is forcing her daughter into an elaborate scam to cover the fact that she claimed the grandchild as her own, and Bristol did not lose the baby fat soon enough..

It may all end up a moot point, if enough of the religious fundies decide that none of it matters, and the press gets cold feet and quits searching.....

EIGHT years of stonewalling and refusal to show documents or undergo serious questioning should have taught us all a lesson about how this stuff works.. If McCain manages to "win", the questions will all stop.. we know that..

And for those who still want to bash on me for "going there", it matters because it's about the LYING, and the calculated coldness of it all.. A mother who would do this to her own children, is capable of a lot worse things when it concerns US..


and



BINGO !
Posted by SoCalDem in General Discussion
Sun Aug 31st 2008, 03:27 AM

This undated photo provided by the Heath family shows Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin pregnant in Wasilla, Alaska. Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., announced Palin as his vice presidential running mate on Friday, Aug. 29, 2008.
(AP Photo/Heath Family)
.........................

My guess would be that this was with one of the girls...and we know she's at LEAST 7 months there..



..............................................................................
This pic snapped near the birth date
by a fellow traveler who was surprised to see her flying coach


Read entry | Discuss (91 comments) | Remove from Journal | Add/Edit intro
Why the Palin "baby" story matters.. It's INSURANCE FRAUD
Posted by SoCalDem in General Discussion
Fri Aug 29th 2008, 01:57 PM
for starters..

A 16 yr old child will eventually become too old to be covered on the parents insurance, and I'm betting that Mrs Guv has some pretty nifty insurance, as does Mr BP-OIL, so if the baby is "Theirs", that handicapped child willl have all the care he will need, BUT

if he's the child of their unwed daughter, no doubt they would end up raising the child anyway, if she plans to go to college..She would probably have insurance coverage for herself while she's in school, but who's gonna pay for that child's coverage, or take care of him,while she's a carefree college student?..and how will she "land a husband" with a handicapped baby?

if she kept the baby, and managed to finish college, that child's disability would surely present a "pre-existing" condition to just about any HR person she would interview with..

I can understand why the parents would want to "help her out", and this sort of thing happens all the time, but for her parents to phony-up the whole thing and claim the child as theirs is ..well..deceptive and insurance fraud..

Read entry | Discuss (113 comments)
.....................................................

Feb 25, 2008.. 7 months pregnant?? you decide
Posted by SoCalDem in General Discussion
Fri Aug 29th 2008, 11:37 AM
http://www.subnet.nga.org/centennial/Images/GovsPortrai...


This was taken at the Nat'l Gov's assn meeting this year..a week before she said she was 7 months pregnant...

http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #17
40. dna could tell the truth someday...
if someone could surreptitiously obtain samples from sarah, todd, and trig...

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKNancy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
19. This crap is just like the freepers and their birth certificate
nonsense. She looks pregnant. Lots of women, especially with only a 6 lb baby carry high.
There are too many involved for this kookykonspiracy to have occured anyway.
Also, the chances of a teen having a Down Syndrome child is pretty rare..not so for 40-something moms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #19
30. How many is "too many"?
- Delivery in Wasilla, one doctor (Palin's gal pal, according to a poster above) and one nurse (or maybe not).
- Bristol's friends didn't know, since she had "a prolonged case of mono".

That's one, maybe two people. Who else had to be "involved"?

Down's Syndrome is rare in either case: 0.1% to 3.6%. That still means 0.1% of young mothers have Down's children.

The OpEd article above speaks volumes. Occam's Razor says it's Bristol's baby. Occam's Razor says Obama was born in Hawaii.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKNancy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #30
51. no it doesn't
The logical and simplest answer is that it is Sarah Palin's baby.
Unless she says otherwise, I still consider it kookery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #51
55. Did you read the OpEd article?
Or post #29 above?

Scary that you take Palin's word on this issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKNancy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #30
52. double post
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 02:00 PM by OKNancy
delete
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnionPatch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #19
43. I wish they'd just let it go.
You're right. It makes us look as desperate for dirt as they are. Who the hell cares anyway? If I distrust and don't like the woman, it would have nothing to do with any pregnancy she did or didn't have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #19
47. Actually, that is incorrect. Most babies born today with DS
are born to younger women because the older women are offered genetic testing and some opt for termination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitizenPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #19
90. Obama released a BC
and it has been approved and verified, whereas Palin has never released birth certificate for trig, or a pic of Bristol any time before the birth. I find it telling that Alaskans started this rumor before Palin was ever picked by the Goat and yet she did nothing to disprove it. The rumors started when Bristol was taken out of school for NO reason. No explanation was ever given to the principle. That's odd.

I don't see how you can compare this to the Obama BC story, aside from the fact that they are both outrageous ideas. What has Palin done to put these rumors at rest? to say they are the same is like saying there aren't any oddities around this birth. Flight while pregnant, have to drive 800 miles to see friend/dr, no record at hospital, etc. ODD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northernlights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #19
134. not in their 5th pregnancy
and not in their 40s, they don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yodoobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
24. Wow. That might cost her the election.

Sarah's career is currently toast.

The only thing that could save it, would be if people keep talking about her, and driving up her name recognition - keeping her in the public eye until 2012.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UpInArms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
25. here's a picture of Palin dated March 14, 2008 - records show Trig being born 35 days later
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/v-gallery/story/345168.h...


Associated Press

From left, Alaska governor Sarah Palin, Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell and Sandy Parnell announce Palin's endorsement of Parnell Friday, March 14, 2008 at the state elections office in Anchorage, Alaska. Parnell had just filed to run against incumbent Republican Don Young for U.S. Congress

and 5 days after Trig's birth:


Trig at 5 Days Old on April 23, 2008
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKNancy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. obviously pregnant and resting her hands on the top of her belly a
classic posture when pregnant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetpotato Donating Member (678 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #27
54. I stand like that
and I've never been pregnant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #27
63. Just admit it, Palin is NOT pregnant. It is totally obvious that she lied her ass off!
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 04:29 PM by TheGoldenRule
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #27
118. I don't see that. She's not resting her hands - she's holding a cell phone.
She doesn't look pregnant to me in that photo. Maybe a first pregnancy but not a fifth, and certainly not compared to photos of Palin during her earlier pregnancies.

It's the photos of her earlier pregnancies that make me believe that Palin was not pregnant last spring.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #25
31. Just because a woman doesn't look pregnant doesn't mean she isn't.
Having said that, that woman doesn't look pregnant in the least in that picture. All the other pictures look like she might possibly be, but it's hard to tell because of the angle, or the clothes she's wearing. But this one looks absolutely damning. She doesn't look pregnant at all. It isn't surprising this is generating all kinds of rumors. She could still be pregnant, though. Women have gone 9 months without showing a bit. It happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #31
64. You can't hide a pregnancy in the last couple of months. It's impossible. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #64
147. It's not impossible. Sorry. I knew a woman who didn't look pregnant.
Right up to her ninth month, and it wasn't even her first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #31
80. Fifth pregnancy which would mean the muscles were already
used to being stretched, plus she looked extremely pregnant in the other pics.

She wasn't pregnant. And, most women who don't show, it's with the first pregnancy, not the fifth. Especially not at her age.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #80
120. Especially not compared to the way she looked during previous pregnancies.
It's the comparison that convinces me.

I've never heard of a woman showing much much less during a fifth pregnancy than during previous pregnancies. Not possible unless she'd become very, very thin and she didn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gollygee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #25
34. Speaking as a 7-month-pregnant woman
Sarah Palin doesn't look pregnant there. She doesn't look anywhere close to how I look, or how I looked in my last pregnancy, or how any third-trimester pregnant woman I've ever seen has looked. Compared to most women, I don't show much because I'm very tall and have a long waist, and I'm massive compared to her. I've been incredibly skeptical of this whole thing before now, but this picture and a couple others I've seen are making me seriously wonder. Either the photos are dated wrong or she wasn't pregnant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #25
70. No way is that woman swollen enough to be within the stated days of those births.
You see it as much in the limbs and face as you do in the belly, and there's no swelling in either of these photos, as there should be.

I've believed from the beginning that this was not sarah's child. Who on earth would give a fragile baby with a lifetime of learning issues to a teenager if they didn't have to?

Also, this kid won't get much health coverage if it's the child of a teen with no job. they really had to claim this kid as sarah's for all the benefits she's allowed.

I don't think it's an immoral decision, but you can't run on religion and family values when your family is this effed up and lies about it in public.

It's the lying that's immoral, not the circumstances of the child.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoesTo11 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #25
82. They sure do look like proud grandparents in the lower photo.
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 06:55 PM by GoesTo11
Not parents though. Parents would a) be wiped out, not wearing earrings and a pearl necklace and have their hair done up and lipstick, and b) would be looking at the baby.

Here is what actual parents would look like. Notice the strong desire to be physically close to their baby.



By the way, this is Levi, Trig & Bristol. The body language here is so obviously different from the Sarah, Todd & Trig photo which looks just like my parents did holding my baby.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CoffeeCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #82
97. That's something that always struck me...
Notice the look on Bristol's face when she's holding Trig. You could see it at political rallies when she
was holding Trig. I'm a mother. I know that look. That is not the look of a sister holding a brother.
That's the loving look a mother gives her own baby.

People on DU have always criticized Sarah Palin for the way she held Trig...like he was a sack of potatoes.

She barely cuddled him and seemed to be very distant with him. She doesn't hold him like a mother holds
a newborn baby.

I'm sorry, but I see this so clearly. Sarah Palin does not have that bond or mother/child connection with
Trig, and it is obvious from watching Bristol---that she does.

Look at those three in the picture above--Levi, Trig and Bristol....that is a family.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #82
126. Yes. Bristol is that baby's mother. I'm certain of it.
I wouldn't care one way or the other except that it speaks to Palin's willingness to lie and use her family for political gain. Also, she separated Trig from his mother during the campaign. Palin sent Bristol home to Alaska while the campaign dragged Trig all over the country showing him off as a prop. That alone was unconscionable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
35. I've always had trouble understanding why
we should care about all this. I don't understand why Palin would hide one of her daughter's pregnancies and then parade the other.

Does having a down syndrome baby give Palin political points? Does having a teen with only one pregnancy out of wedlock also give her points? If so, I can't imagine that she would gain more political points then she would actually lose.

Other than the proof that "abstinence only" education does not work, I find no value in probing into these personal issues, which are no business of mine in the first place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gollygee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. That's one of the reasons I've been so skeptical
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 12:36 PM by gollygee
That is reason #1, and the fact that older moms have a much higher chance of having a child with Down Syndrome.

But the photos really and truly don't look to be of a pregnant woman. I'm wondering if the dates of the photos are off or they've been photoshopped or something.

It certainly shouldn't really matter at this point as she isn't even running for anything now. I'm tired of her. I wish she would stop being such a big discussion point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #36
79. It is easy to change
the time stamp on a photograph. Most of my cameras, video and still, show an incorrect date because I've been too lazy to program them. And yes, I'm tired of her too. She may be the most unqualified politician in history. It is frightening that she was actually considered for VP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. Does having a down syndrome baby give Palin political points?
yes. the right-to-lifers ate that shit up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. So let me get this straight
Her daughter has a hidden pregnancy, and then gives birth to a down syndrome baby, out of wedlock. Sarah says, aha, I'll lie and say it's mine because it will score me more political points. Then her daughter rushes out and gets pregnant again within weeks of giving birth, and Sarah again uses her for political points, because, uh, right-to-lifers think teens having sex is cool?

It just doesn't make sense to me. And like I said, it's really none of my business in the first place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. The events in question happened before being picked for VP
The cover up was only designed to survive Alaskan political scrutiny, not national.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #39
42. if you're asking me to make sense out of this whack-job's life..
i'm afraid i can't help you. alls i know with any certainty is that she lies. about everything. so, much like bush, i just assume that anything coming out of her moose burger hole is a lie, until proven otherwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #42
44. Well, you're preaching to the choir
I don't agree with her on a single issue. I loathe pretty much everything she stands for. I guess if these pregnancies had actually won the presidency for McCain I might be inclined to care. But I just don't give a rat's ass about her. I feel sorry for the baby. Life is hard enough without a disability, not to mention a mother the likes of her. I feel sorry for all her kids actually.

But again, her personal life is none of my business, as mine is none of hers, even though she would like it to be.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #39
46. Here's why this is our business.
If indeed Palin was pregnant with a fetus that had Down Syndrome, her attending that conference in TX shows a breathtaking lack of judgment as well as a complete and utter disregard for the individuals on the planes she flew.

Why did she have an amnio in the first place if she's so pro-life? I had one with my son because the AFP came back that he probably had DS and I was going to attempt a VBAC after the birth of my daughter. I had no intentions of aborting him, but wanted to know if there were indeed heart problems so that I wouldn't put the baby through the stress of birth, often called 'the most dangerous trip you will ever take'. Amnios in it and of themselves have caused pregnancy loss. It was extremely risky and unnecessary.

(He doesn't have DS, BTW. He's a completely normal 16yo)

Here's why she had the amnio. Bristol had lined up an adoptive couple who wanted the baby, but who wanted to ensure the baby was healthy. Most DS babies are born to young women because most older women are offered genetic testing and if the baby does return with an anomaly, a lot choose to terminate.

The couple discovered Trig had DS, backed out, it was too late to find another, so SP covered it up.

She's a liar, a con and a fraud. Her abstinence only education didn't work and she couldn't admit it.

And, Levi's kissing the baby on stage at the convention was kind of telling as well. Not a lot of boyfriends do that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #46
73. The whole thing is just all too much
for me to figure. I do know that family dynamics can be strange, and that most of us are forced to deal with the unexpected no matter how neatly planned our lives may be.

I certainly wouldn't want anyone delving into, or judging, my personal choices. It is a shame that Sarah Palin may have made some very personal, and what should have been private, choices for political gain.

If she did indeed use these intimate family issues to win votes, it is disgusting. It seems more likely that whatever the story, she probably, in her own twisted mind, tried frantically to do what would be best for both her political life and family, out of, what would be to her, an embarrassing situation. Maybe we should have sympathy for her. Can you imagine living in her head, trying to keep up that facade; the squeaky clean, correct woman she claims to be?

There is enough about her politics to despise without including her family life. The country saw that. Her fan base was small, and did nothing to improve McCain's numbers, at least not after those first hyped post convention weeks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rainbow4321 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #46
78. I've said in the past that we need to remember who is telling us the diagnosis
Palin. There are a boatload of other neuro related syndomes but Down's fits nicely into the equation of a 40+ yr old mom giving birth.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #46
135. What teenage boyfriend kisses and cuddles his fiancee's little brother?
I agree. I'm convinced. Levi is the father and Bristol is the mother of Trig. None of this would matter at all except that Sarah Palin has twisted a very common occurrence into a lie to further her political ambitions.

She is a psychopath and I feel sorry for Bristol and her little baby.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #135
138. Didn't you find that a bit odd?
I mean, especially based on the kid's rather repellant MySpace page that was scrubbed immediately after the selection of Palin and announcement that Bristol was pregnant.

He could be the sweetest, most benevolent boy on the planet, but that MySpace page indicates otherwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #35
65. It matters because it proves she's a lying snake who will do anything to win.
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #35
133. Lying about this says a lot about Palin's willingness to use her family as props.
Yes, having a Down Syndrome baby gave Palin political points - she made sure of that.

Why would Palin hide her daughter's pregnancy and then parade it? Because the circumstances changed drastically.

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that Bristol became pregnant last year. It's not that unusual for a family to pretend that the child of an unwed teenage daughter is actually the child of the grandmother. There are always rumors but most people in the community are kind about the situation and don't make a big deal out of it.

But then Palin accepted the VP nomination as a far-right "family values" candidate. She'd already created the lie about being Trig's mother instead of grandmother. The rumors about Bristol's pregnancy are about to go world-wide. The National Enquirer is camped out in Wasilla. And Bristol looks like she's either pregnant or recently gave birth.

So, pushed into a corner, the Palin campaign admits that Bristol is pregnant - except that Bristol isn't pregnant anymore. Nursing mothers look like pregnant women, and anyway Bristol is quickly whisked back to Wasilla and kept out of sight during the rest of the campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #35
150. She hid the first pregnanacy as governor of Alaska. As candidate for
VP, there was no way she could hide the second pregnancy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MindMatter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
45. The more important questions: 1) why is a 45-year-old woman palling around
with a sperm donor, and

b) who is the father?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
48. opednews link has some really good points.
One would imagine that the hospital would be happy to list the birth of the governors daughter at their hospital.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
56. The baby could be Track's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #56
57. Maybe...
But Bristol was the one with the "prolonged case of mono"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #57
154. If Bristol is pregnant now, I can't see her getting pregnant so soon after
Trig's birth. I do know that it can rarely happen but she would have to have become impregnated almost immediately after delivery and the baby's due on the 18th of this month is too early. She would have to be due in January as Trig was born in April.

I mentioned it in a post of mine below (with link), an Alaskan radio producer was on Thom Hartmann and floated that Trig might be Track's. After all, from some accounts, Trig was pressured to go into the Army, but maybe he wasn't prepared to have a shotgun wedding to his girlfriend. Trig would have been the illegitimate (I hate that term) grandson of the Governor...which to them, might have been a stigma. Of course the story of Bristol's pregnancy broke nationally and with the help of the McCain team's finesse, turned it into almost a positive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #56
59. I don't think they'd cover for the boy.
He's an adult, he's in the military. They'd just marry him off to the Mom. That the marriage and birth dates didn't quite line up would barely even cause a ripple- everybody knows first babies tend to be early but strangely large. ;)

Anyhow, I can't imagine many teenage moms would just hand over their kid and disappear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #59
84. Track's girfriend didn't disappear. She was on the campaign trail with Palin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #84
96. the point is there would not be reason to cover up if the baby is Track's
since he is an adult and was going into the military.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 06:19 AM
Response to Reply #56
101. Oh, C'mon. Just because she's a horrible candidate doesn't
increase the likelihood of incest among her children. That's simply absurd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #101
102. Did I say incest? NEVER! Track's girlfriend schlepped along the campaign trail,
and it seems, that if Bristol is really pregnant, it is unlikely that she got pregnant seconds again after Trig was born.

I was taking it out of the normal sexist perspective of an unwed mother, to an unwed father.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #102
106. What are you talking about? Track was overseas during the campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #106
139. But his girlfriend was on the campaign trail with Palin and invisible. Here is a link
Read down about Track's girlfriend "babysitting"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


The suggestion that the baby might be Track's was discussed on Thom Hartmann's program and floated out there by an Alaskan Liberal Radio producer

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #139
142. Okay, gotcha. I thought you were inferring that the baby was Track
and Bristol's. My apologies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #142
151. Apology accepted! When you posted what you did, the thought
horrified me! I believe that there is some deception with Palin's pregnancy but not anything as awful as that.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTyankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
60. I want more investigation into this because I want Sarah Palin to be utterly destroyed politically.
I want her finished off, humiliated for her lying and hyppocrisy. I never want to see her again...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #60
67. Word. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #67
94. Word skizzle.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #60
104. Same here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
66. Palin continues the republicon homelander tradition of lies
lies. Woe unto America and Americans. Homelander lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
69. Palin's "pregnancy" was straight out of some Douglas Sirk movie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleClarkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
71. Who gives a flying fuck on a stick.
Seriously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
INDIA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:26 PM
Response to Original message
74. ***SOMEBODY PLEASE ANSWER THIS***
Sorry for the Caps lock and asterisks, I just haven't heard an answer for this question yet, lol...(and for the record, I believe there is definitely something to this rumor/scandal, Andrew Sullivan is awesome)


Question: So the big "theory" is that it was Bristol's child and that Sarah was never pregnant with Trig, right? So why was it necessary to concoct the whole "fluid leaking" portion of the story? Why not fly home, claim normal labor once home in Wasilla?

It doesn't make sense. Either she is...

A) Actually the mother, and Reckless and dangerous for flying after water breaking.

or...

B) Not the mother, rushed home to be with Bristol after she went into labor. But if this was all an elaborate ruse, including fake pregnancy pads, *why make up the water breaking in Dallas story and then let the press have it?* That is the only part of this that seems implausable. If you're concocting an entire facke pregnancy, why make part of the story so outrageous? Why not make the birth "ho hum" and average?

any theories???

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #74
86. So where is this proof?
I went to all the links and saw no "proof" offered. I see speculation, rumors, innuendo and Andrew Sullivan trying to fit his gigantic asshat ego on a piece of paper.

This is about as pathetic as the Obama birth certificate "scandal".

Thanks for posting this, it embarrasses us all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #86
89. That's an awfully big "all" you're employing. Mice in your pocket?
And you're in a pretty lonely "embarrassed" group on this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #89
92. Not as lonely as you think, I would guess. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #92
93. I can count n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 01:02 AM
Response to Reply #93
99. Perhaps the brighter
DU members have stayed off this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #89
146. Yeah I guesss people are too
Edited on Sat Dec-06-08 12:30 PM by walldude
stupid to realize when they look like fucking morons. My bad.

Also you still haven't come up with the "PROOF" you offered in your OP. Fucking useless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #74
88. Maybe she was supposed to be somewhere else after her Dallas speech?
That would be why she had to explain the rush home. e.g. if she was scheduled to attend a dinner in Dallas that night. For all we know her ticket to Anchorage was for the next day, and she changed the day because Bristol went into labor (it does seem odd that she flew Coach on that trip...maybe there weren't any seats in First?) Dunno.

The sub-theory above (adoptive parents changing their mind) would explain much as well. Otherwise she could have just claimed "family emergency" (for the trip home) since then there's no baby to explain. Just a daughter who's "finally gotten over her mono". But since they kept the baby, we heard the "water breaking in Dallas" story, since the baby had to come from somewhere.

AFAIK she didn't do the fake pads. If so they weren't very convincing.

One key point is: did the Alaskan press hear about her being 7 months pregnant before or after the fact?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
INDIA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #88
109. Right, but she didn't tell anybody at the conference about her water breaking...
ALLEGEDLY, the only person she spoke to was her doctor. And I would think being 8 months pregnant would be an excuse in and of itself to duck out of an event early, regardless of if she was actually in labor or not. Just say "my doctor wants me home immediately after the speech" etc. etc.

And as I said earlier, she didn't use the water breaking as an excuse to duck out. I don't think anybody knew at the conference.

As I said earlier, I think theres something to this. But this portion of the story (making up the "water breaking then flying" tale) doesn't make any sense. An inteligent person would have just waited till landing in AK, then said "oops, my water broke" and had the baby.

Then again, it is POSSIBLE that Sarah Palin, being a vapid moron, just didn't think this story through very well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #109
145. Palin has already Proven herself to be a vapid moron and a LIAR, so
why would whatever she said about the circumstances surrounding Trig's birth be any different than her other Lies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #109
157. She told the person in charge of the conference
that she was having contractions. Its in the WSJ report of her giving the speech, because he was kind of freaked out about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
votetastic Donating Member (350 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #74
105. To answer your question... If Trig had been born while Sarah was in TX..
it would have made the story much more believable if she was actually in the delivery room with the baby, and was later witnessed leaving the hospital with her new baby. Only her doctor needed to know who the real mother was, but everyone else at the hospital could have seen her, and it would have lent veracity to the story. Also, she would need to be on hand for the insurance/birth certificate parts of the scam. These would need to be taken care of at the time of Trig's actual birth, and couldn't be delayed. Also, she probably just wanted to be there while her daughter was giving birth.

That is, assuming Trig is Bristol's baby..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
INDIA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #105
108. Right, I already figured that.
If she wasn't pregnant, then the "fake birth" would HAVE to take place in Wasilla, among supporters and close friends. But I still have a problem with her making up the portion of the story about the water breaking in Dallas and then flying home. Why make up such a ridiculous, attention grabbing portion of the story?

Another poster above stated that maybe she used it as an excuse to leave (and get home with Bristol in labor), but she didn't tell anybody at the conference!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #105
141. And remember.... the doc that delivered Trig
is a buddy of Palin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #74
128. I've been wondering the exact same thing. Why make that up?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #74
144. Palin had to leave to "give birth", but if she said she was in labor, it would have appeared
Edited on Sat Dec-06-08 12:20 PM by OmmmSweetOmmm
even more foolhardy to fly to Alaska to give birth. Remember, she really isn't that bright, and maybe to her, water breaking was not supposedly a biggie....

Not supposedly a biggie? During labor of my second son, my doctor BROKE my water to hasten delivery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #74
160. The theory I heard
was that Sarah Palin was essentially bragging about how "tough" she is. The water breaking thing was just a tall tale, in a similar spirit as a hunting story "I got in a fist fight with a grizzly bear".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rainbow4321 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
75. Levi spoke with the media a few months ago...due date "around Dec 18th"
Here is Bristol on election day..she would be roughly 7.5 months pregnant if one goes by this due date. Just IMHO, she doesn't look any bigger than she was at the convention.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gollygee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #75
77. If it's her first pregnancy
that would be about right for 7.5 months I think. If it's her second, probably more like 6 or so? But most women don't show as much during the first pregnancy because our abdominal muscles are much stronger at that point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:02 PM
Response to Original message
95. Point 1: Somewhere there is a doctor who knows the truth.
Point 2: Said doctor can speak freely about one of the two women as one of them is not his patient.

Long shot, I know, but hey, stranger things. It's also very easy to pump people for information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #95
143. Not really. Said doctor can speak freely about one of them when
said patient has passed away. Not before. HIPAA and all that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wordpix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 07:54 AM
Response to Original message
103. I spoke with someone who worked with her during that time---she was pregnant
according to the source
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #103
137. If your source "worked with" Palin then she is not an objective witness.
Palin is the governor of Alaska. She's demonstrated absolute ruthlessness in getting her way. I'm sure that everyone who works with Palin is scared to death of her revenge if they put a foot wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Midlodemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #103
149. And all the housewives on Wisteria Lane thought Bree was pregnant
as well. Faking a pregnancy isn't that hard. It's been done many times before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Breeze54 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
121. Can I get fries with this?
O.M.G. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
122. yawn.
let's move on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Breeze54 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
125. Nominating for a DUzy!!!!
:P

:rofl: :rofl:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rainbow4321 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
131. Her belly in that pic vs a video of her a few days and weeks later
Edited on Sat Dec-06-08 11:43 AM by rainbow4321
So she goes from no belly on March 26th to a slightly large belly on or about April 8 to looking like she swallowed a watermelon on April 13th??

http://bojack.org/2008/12/sarah_palins_fake_pregnancy_b...

March 26th



On or about April 8th (From the link: Here is a screenshot from a documentary video of Palin shot on April 8 (or within two days of that date) by the Israeli filmmaker Elan Frank.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQMEwK781yE (screenshot 5:17 into video)


April 13th
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #131
140. Has anyone checked to see if the pregnant looking pic was
photoshopped. That mysteriously appeared at a FLICKR after the discussion of her pregnancy began. You would think that it would have been posted in April when it was taken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
155. She was NOT pregnant.
I don't know why people are arguing over this. In previous photos of Palin being pregnant, it was obvious she was. If you look at that other photo of her 35 days before she gave birth, it's obvious she isn't pregnant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
156. All republicans are liars. Sarah Palin is a Republican.
Therefore, she is a liar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
southernyankeebelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
159. I have always felt it was Bristol and the truth will set you free
Because when they had the baby dressed in the holloween costume you watched Bristol looking at the baby. That is a look of a proud momma. I think she would have admitted it but aain she is with child for the 2nd time. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Sooner or later Bristol will crack and tell the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 24th 2014, 01:40 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC