It has been nearly 10 years since then-vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin could not name a single newspaper that she read to stay informed in an interview with Katie Couric. But it appears that she has learned to occasionally peruse national publications since then, as the former Alaska governor filed a defamation lawsuit Tuesday against the New York Times in response to an editorial that linked her to the 2011 shooting of Democratic Representative Gabby Giffords.

Palin’s lawyers claim that the connection was published “knowingly, intentionally, willfully, wantonly and maliciously, with the intent to harm Mrs. Palin, or in blatant disregard of the substantial likelihood of causing her harm.” They also added that by keeping the editorial up, the Times “violated the law and its own policies.”

The editorial in question–titled “America’s Lethal Politics”–drew a parallel between the June 14 shooting that injured Representative Steve Scalise (R-LA) and several others at a baseball field in Alexandria, and the 2011 shooting in Arizona. The piece said that both attacks were incited by political rhetoric which has become a “sickeningly familiar pattern.”

“Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs,” it read at one point. It also went on to draw connections between that advertisement and the shooter’s motivation to attack Giffords, despite a Times article from earlier this year that rejected that notion. The Times’ opinion section corrected these concerns the next day and later tweeted out an apology.

The $75,000 defamation suit claims the newspaper’s correction and subsequent apology were “devoid of any reference to Mrs. Palin” and were “woefully insufficient.”

Essentially Palin is arguing that the editorial published by the Times was libelous. Because the defamation in question was published as a written work, the suit would have to follow the legal standards of a libel case. Palin is a “public figure”–specifically an “all-purpose public figure”–meaning she is someone whose fame or position regularly puts them in the public eye. The courts decided in the 70s–ironically through a case that also involved the Times–that public figures have to prove “actual malice”–meaning the statements about the person were published with reckless disregard for whether they were false or true. In other words, Palin’s lawyers need to show that the alleged false statements in the editorial were published intentionally, or with total disregard for the truth.

If it seems like this is a high standard that is tough to prove, it’s because it is. Especially given this situation. Most statements made in editorials are defended as opinion. Even if the court does not consider the statements to be opinions, it might be even more difficult to prove her reputation was damaged. When Sarah Palin’s contract with Fox News ended in 2015, FiveThirtyEight found that her favorability rating was at an all time low, even among Republicans. It is difficult to defame the character of someone who is already not viewed too highly, especially when the average Times reader is left-leaning. Some might even argue that this situation has made Palin more sympathetic. While it was expected that conservatives would cheer the lawsuit, even the Washington Post was quick to call out the Times for its mistake.

There is a chance, as there always is, that she could win this case. Palin’s legal team includes one of the lawyers from the famous case in which Hulk Hogan sued Gawker into oblivion for publishing his sex tape. The Columbia Journalism Review referenced this case–among others–as “evidence that the growing unpopularity of media may translate into less-sympathetic jury pools.”

Regardless of how this case turns out, the Times publishing a debunked talking point is far from a good look for the publication. At best, the editorial board lazily tried to remind readers that Sarah Palin did put out an ad with crosshairs of a gun sight over districts with Democrats that voted for the Affordable Care Act with the phrase “Don’t Retreat, Instead – RELOAD!”, and the next day vandals happened to smash in her office’s windows. At worst, the board committed libel against a woman who promoted birtherism and claimed that former president Barack Obama spent $2 million to hide his real birth certificate.

Gabe Fernandez

Gabe is an editorial intern at Law Street. He is a Peruvian-American Senior at the University of Maryland pursuing a double degree in Multiplatform Journalism and Marketing. In his free time, he can be found photographing concerts, running around the city, and supporting Manchester United. Contact Gabe at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will Sarah Palin’s Defamation Suit Against the New York Times Succeed? appeared first on Law Street.

How do Superdelegates Work? And Why are People so Mad?

“Democratic Convention @ Invesco” courtesy of rabidmoose; License: (CC BY 2.0)

When news broke that Bernie Sanders won the New Hampshire primary by more than 20 percent, yet may tie Hillary Clinton in delegates, Sanders supporters and Hillary-haters were irate. How could this be? What sort of system lets that happen? Welcome to the primaries, where everything’s made up and the points don’t matter. Okay, they matter a little bit, but it’s complicated. To understand the outrage after the New Hampshire primary, you need to look closer at the role of superdelegates. Read the full article here.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Top 10 Election Posts of 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Last week Sarah Palin sensed divine intervention, Donald Trump supported torture techniques, and Texas required women to cremate unborn fetuses. ICYMI–check out these top stories from Law Street below!

1. Sarah Palin Claims God Intervened and Helped Trump Win the Election

Sarah Palin likes Donald Trump, but doesn’t believe he made it all the way to the White House on his own. On the holiday edition of the Breitbart News Daily radio show she claimed that God was responsible for Trump’s win. In the show, she said she saw the role “divine providence” played on the campaign trail. She said people have been desperate for a change after the country’s deterioration and that his victory was due to people praying to God that the rest of the citizens would wake up. Read the full article here.

2. Trump Could Dismiss Lawsuit by CIA Torture Victims

In the years following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the CIA broadened its torture toolkit. Detainees were stuffed in boxes. They were forced to spend hours holding uncomfortable positions, sometimes barred from sleeping for days at a time. And of course, there was waterboarding. In October 2015, two men who were subjected to the CIA’s interrogations at secret prisons in Afghanistan filed lawsuits against the two CIA contractors who sculpted the agency’s torture program. Read the full article here.

3. New Rules in Texas Will Require Burial or Cremation of Fetal Remains

Texas established new rules preventing health care facilities from disposing of fetal remains following an abortion or any miscarriage that requires a medical procedure–instead, the state will now require women to pay for the burial or cremation of those remains. Read the full article here.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Sarah Palin likes Donald Trump, but doesn’t believe he made it all the way to the White House on his own. On the holiday edition of the Breitbart News Daily radio show she claimed that God was responsible for Trump’s win. In the show, she said she saw the role “divine providence” played on the campaign trail. She said people have been desperate for a change after the country’s deterioration and that his victory was due to people praying to God that the rest of the citizens would wake up. Palin claimed she had seen it “first-hand.” And she also said this:

I saw more and more people’s eyes open, and I think so much of that was based on the church in general, those people of faith who were praying to God that people would wake up. Remember, our Founders dedicated this land, this new country that would be America, this idea of America, dedicated it to God. If I were President, I’d re-dedicate us to God.

Palin has described herself as a “Bible-believing Christian,” saying that God has an important role to play in American elections. But the last time she said that God would do the right thing for America by helping John McCain beat Barack Obama in 2008, her predictions were wrong and Obama became the first black president in U.S. history. Many people had something to say about her views on religion and the 2016 election:

Dear Sarah Palin,

God heard what you said and wants you to know he responded thusly: “Leave me out of this.”

— Ricky Pine ⚡️❄️ (@redrainricky) November 30, 2016

Sarah Palin says God made Trump win, confusing God with slaveowners who demanded an electoral college during the constitutional convention.

— John Fugelsang (@JohnFugelsang) November 30, 2016

Palin also said: “We found our revolutionary Donald Trump, he’s our messenger. Donald Trump heard the voice of the people and allowed the people to expose what needed exposing.”

To make Palin’s year even better, it was reported on Wednesday that she is being considered for a cabinet role as the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. According to a Palin aide she has been telling Trump transition officials that she feels she could be of use in a “productive and positive way.” She has focused on the VA for a while; her eldest son is an Iraq War veteran and earlier this week her son-in-law posted a video to Facebook promoting her work with veterans. Though Palin has not yet been to the Trump Tower to meet with the President-elect, she was one of his first endorsements.

There were mixed reactions on social media to that news as well.

Sarah Palin is “super duper excited” that she might be in charge of the dept for animal doctors. @monicajibanez @georgeswright

— AnnAMae (@SweetasPHI) November 30, 2016

Sarah Palin as VA Secretary seems completely insane until you remember that Donald Trump was just elected President.

— Dan Pfeiffer (@danpfeiffer) November 30, 2016

I’m probably more qualified to be VA Secretary than Sarah Palin just by having ‘VA’ in my Twitter name

— Matt Oswalt (@MattOswaltVA) November 30, 2016

Palin has also been talked about for the position of Energy Secretary, which could be pretty catastrophic considering she posted a Facebook status showing off her view on energy, saying “Drill, baby, drill!” She also wrote: ”The inherent link between energy and security, and energy and prosperity, is real and recognized by every American except sketchy politicians and deceived faux environmentalists.” So, if you thought we left Palin behind in 2008, don’t worry, she’s back and busy in 2016.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Sarah Palin Claims God Intervened and Helped Trump Win the Election appeared first on Law Street.

The Great American Debate: Jorts

The invention of jorts might be one of the most American things out there. It is almost guaranteed that idiots will be wearing jorts this Fourth of July weekend. But people are still trying to decide what true jorts really. There’s what I call “cut-off jeans” and then there are jeans that have been fashioned into shorts. In my opinion, they are gross and should not exist. Will we ever reach a consensus on the jorts issue?

Every time I see someone wearing jorts I give them a head nod so they know what’s up. Jorts gotta stick together you know

— vasilios poulos (@poulos3317) June 20, 2016

i wear jorts. proudly. i don’t give a fuck what you think. #cutoffs

— marc maron (@marcmaron) June 28, 2016

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: Independence Day Edition appeared first on Law Street.

Everybody’s got their ‘guy.’ He’s the first person to take your side when the going gets tough, and your intermediary with all the people you just don’t have time for. For Donald Trump, Ben Carson is that guy, and somehow, he’s the guy Trump trusts with his secrets. The trouble is, Carson might not be exercising the caution a campaign surrogate usually needs to.

Ben Carson was riding in a car with his wife Candy on his way to an interview, when the reporter who was along for the ride told him about a poll stacking up the favorability rankings of potential vice presidential picks. The reporter told Carson the names on the list, in order of favorability. After Ben Carson, who was seen as the most favorable vice presidential pick, the list included John Kasich, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin, and Chris Christie.

After stating that he was not interested in being a part of Donald Trump’s administration, Carson did what no nominee’s spokesperson should do: he told the press about the short list. When asked about those five names, Carson said “Those are all people on our list.”

The media will endlessly speculate about potential vice presidential nominees, but until the announcement is made, campaigns are usually tight-lipped about who their candidate is actually considering. Hillary Clinton’s vice presidential choices are under tight wraps, with pundits’ speculations spanning from Elizabeth Warren to John Kasich. Closely guarding the decision-making process keeps the campaign’s final selection exciting, and insures against a bombshell found during the vetting process.

Of course, Carson tried to walk back his statement, calling the Washington Post to explain. “When it comes to who could be the vice president and you name a list of people, I’m going to say yes to everybody, everybody could potentially be considered, doesn’t mean they are on the shortlist.” So when Ben Carson says “Those are all people on our list” that doesn’t mean they are actually on the list.”

The candidates mentioned in the poll do present a VP Vexing Problem–the candidates are either unknown to the public, or they are highly unfavorable, with ratings like Palin’s and Cruz’s around 50 percent unfavorable. Clinton’s camp has a different problem–their choices aren’t too strongly unfavorable, but most of them are unknown to the general public. Likely choices such as Tim Kaine, Sherrod Brown, and Julian Castro are unknown by 30 to 40 percent of voters. The good news for Clinton is that no one–not Huma, not Bill, not anyone–is dishing out her tightly-held list of candidates.

Sean Simon

Sean Simon is an Editorial News Senior Fellow at Law Street, and a senior at The George Washington University, studying Communications and Psychology. In his spare time, he loves exploring D.C. restaurants, solving crossword puzzles, and watching sad foreign films. Contact Sean at SSimon@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Ben Carson May Or May Not Have Leaked Trump’s VP List appeared first on Law Street.

An already divided Republican Party saw another big name choosing sides between the presumptive party flag bearer Donald Trump and his reluctant new adversary, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.

Former Alaskan governor and GOP Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin took to Facebook on Sunday to jab at Ryan, endorsing his opponent for the Wisconsin 1st Congressional District primary in August.

“Rep. Paul Ryan abandoned the district he was to represent as special interests dictated his legislative priorities. Without ever having a real job outside of politics, it seems he disconnected himself from the people, thus easily disrespected the will of the people. It’s time for a change,” she wrote, throwing her support behind businessman Paul Nehlen instead of House Speaker Ryan.

Palin told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Sunday she thinks Ryan will be “Cantored”, in a reference to Eric Cantor, the former House Majority leader who was ousted from that position in a shocking upset in 2014.

In a surprising dissent from nearly a century of Speakers’ supporting presumptive presidential nominees, Ryan stopped short of backing Trump last week, which set off a bit of a feud between the two men. Inaction to unite the Republican party by Trump is what Ryan cited as the reason for his reluctance.

Palin endorsed Trump at a campaign rally in Iowa in January, which explains her taking umbrage at Ryan’s refusal to do the same.

For now, at least, Ryan remains at an impasse in supporting a man with whom he has significant ideological disagreements. As of Monday morning, however, tensions appeared to thaw a bit when Trump distanced himself from Palin’s decision to endorse Ryan’s primary challenger. For his part, Ryan deferred to Trump’s claim that he could unseat him as chairman of the Republican National Convention, telling a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel columnist he would do what he was asked.

A closed door meeting between Trump, Ryan, and other GOP leaders is set for Thursday in Washington. Whether that leads to an endorsement from Ryan remains to be seen, though it would be a positive development for a party being split apart by internecine, seemingly daily conflicts.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will Paul Ryan Be ‘Cantored’? Sarah Palin Thinks So appeared first on Law Street.

Former Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin is threatening to sue rapper Azealia Banks after a mixup over a satirical article spawned a profanity-laced Twitter feud that is definitely NSFW.

The feud probably came as no surprise to hip hop fans, since the “212” rapper’s fledgling music career has easily been overshadowed by her propensity for internet trolling.

When Banks isn’t calling flight attendants “f*ggots” or renaming Iggy Azalea “Igloo Australia,” she lets her “trigger fingers turn to twitter fingers” by inciting nasty feuds with celebrities seemingly at random.

However, the normally unapologetic rapper may have just swallowed a bit of her pride after Palin threatened to take legal action if Banks didn’t issue a public apology.

But before we get to that, let’s recap the bizarre timeline of events that got us here.

March 31:

A satirical website posted an article with a clickbait title claiming to quote Palin as saying “Even The French Understand That Slavery Wasn’t Our Fault, Because The Negroes Liked It.” Fake Palin went on to say,

I’m going to say it once again loudly and clearly: Negroes loved being slaves and they were doing just fine under our rules. So, you see, you can’t really blame us for any of it, not legitimately.

April 3:

Banks presumably stumbled upon said article (clearly not knowing that that it is fake), and launched into one of her notorious Twitter rants.

The tweets have since been deleted, but not before someone at the Media Research Center quickly managed to snag screenshots that can be seen here.

***Warning: This is where the NSFW part comes in

Banks writes:

12:42 am

Sarah Palin needs to have her hair shaved off to a buzz cut, get headfucked by a big veiny, ashy, black dick then be locked in a cupboard.

12:44 am

Hideous. At least suk a nigga dick or summ’ before you start talking shit about “black people willingly accepting slavery”. Least she can do

12:46 am

Honestly… Let’s find the biggest burliest blackest negroes and let them runa train on her. Film it and put it on worldstar.

April 4

Breitbart publishes an article titled “Rapper Azealia Banks Calls for Sarah Palin to Be Gang-Raped by Black Men.”

April 5

(This is point where deciphering the timeline got a little bit messy, so I’m going to break it down by event.)

Palin Responds on Facebook

Palin responds to the article by writing an open letter to Banks on her Facebook, in which she writes,

Hey Female Rapper – listen up, little darling. No one has any idea what you’re wigging out about in these bizarre, violent rants against me, but you’re obviously not exercising enough intelligence to acknowledge you’ve been sucked into believing some fake interview in which I supposedly offered comments representing the antithesis of my truth.

Palin then promises to check her daughter’s playlist to make sure none of Banks’ “anti-woman, pro-rape garbage” is on it.

Legal Threats Are Made

Taking Trump’s lead, Palin then tells People Magazine in an interview that she plans to take legal action against Banks “on behalf of all reasonable women of every age, race and political leaning” if Banks doesn’t issue a public apology.

Banks Responds on Twitter

LOL, if Sarah Palin actually decides to sue me i’ll only use the controversy to make myself an even larger American Cultural Figure.

— AZEALIABANKS (@AZEALIABANKS) April 5, 2016

The Sarah Palin page in history will be condensed to a footnote in the Azealia Banks chapter. Well behaved women seldom make history.

— AZEALIABANKS (@AZEALIABANKS) April 5, 2016

Everyone can tell you’re spreading them cheeks for Mr. Trump Sarah….. you ain’t got to lie.

— AZEALIABANKS (@AZEALIABANKS) April 5, 2016

Then She Kinda Apologizes

In a now-deleted letter posted to her Tumblr, Banks combines a mix of flattery and insults to pen what very well may be the strangest apology ever. At one point Banks attempts to explain to the 52-year-old politician the distinctions between “running a train” on someone and rape, as well as ends the letter by saying that “if Bristol Palin listened to my music she probably wouldn’t have all those cotdamn kids!!!! ;-P #sis #iud #stayinschool #causeitsthebest””

So…now you should be all caught up.

It’s extremely doubtful that Palin will actually accept Banks’ apology, especially since the rapper’s recent Twitter feed has become largely devoted to mocking Palin. That being said, a legitimate lawsuit doesn’t necessarily seem all that likely either. For now, all we can do is sit back and wait for Palin’s response.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Azealia Banks’ Feud With Sarah Palin is Bizarre and Definitely NSFW appeared first on Law Street.

Americans struggling with real-life small court claims may soon have a new television bigwig to try their cases in the court of public opinion. Former Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin is rumored to have plans to add court TV judge to her reality television resume by starring in a new Judge Judy-style court room reality show.

A “source close to the process” told People that Palin signed a production deal in February with the Montana-based production company Warm Springs.

A signed production deal would imply that Palin could soon begin filming a pilot of the show to shop around to networks.

But wait a second, don’t you have to have an actual J.D. to be a judge?

Well, not exactly.

Technically court TV shows are essentially dramatized arbitration cases on TV sets that look like small claims courts. When not using actors, producers of these shows typically try to contact parties with pending litigation in small claims courts, and give them the opportunity to settle the case through arbitration on TV instead. Arbitration is a type of dispute resolution where parties mutually agree to let a third party arbitrator settle the case for them outside of court. This type of legal proceeding is ideal for people looking for a faster and cheaper litigation alternative. Arbitrators, however, are not required to have a law degree to settle cases.

For more information read “What’s the Verdict? The Truth Behind TV Court Shows” here.

While the actual job qualifications vary from state to state, most arbitrators are required to hold at a minimum a bachelor’s degree and complete training through a basic 40-hour course and 20 additional hours in advanced coursework.

Even without a law degree, cases settled through arbitration are legally binding and in most cases cannot be appealed.

Many court TV judges like Judge Judith Sheindlin, aka Judge Judy, and Judge Joe Brown do have actual law degrees, but it is entirely possible for Palin to become a court TV judge without one.

It also doesn’t hurt that she already has plenty of experience in front of the camera after working as an on-air contributor for FOX News and starring in her TLC reality show “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” in 2010. In 2014 Palin also launched “Amazing America with Sarah Palin,” an outdoor-themed show on The Sportsman Channel.

According to People’s source, “Palin’s telegenic personality, wide appeal and common sense wisdom make her a natural for this kind of format and she was Warm Springs’ top pick for this project.”

Since these are merely rumors that we’re talking about here, and no confirmation has been released from Palin’s camp, it’s hard to say what direction Palin could take with the show.

Needless to say if this does become a real show, I will be watching with same intrigue of someone watching a house catch fire. You know before you see it that it’s probably going to be sad, but at the same time you can’t make yourself look away from the flames.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Apparently Sarah Palin Doesn’t Need a Law Degree to be the Next Judge Judy appeared first on Law Street.

Clad in a jangle-y, fringe-y sweater, Sarah Palin grabbed a gooseneck microphone Tuesday night, beamed and said, “This is gonna be so much fun.” And boy, was she right.

Palin, second only perhaps to Donald Trump himself, understands the spectacle of the media–after all, the two have both starred in their own reality television shows. During her endorsement speech, Sarah Palin announced that Trump wouldn’t “pussyfoot around” and would “kick ISIS’ ass.” Remember when she was almost the Vice President of the United States? And we thought that was the height of lunacy.

That sweater, by the way, has now sold-out from Saks Fifth Avenue at its original $695 price. For a cheaper option, coat a magician’s cape in clear glue, stand in your kitchen, and detonate a firework in your silverware drawer.

As soon as Sarah Palin’s frantic, wholly non-sequitur speech went online, various internet communities quickly created send-ups.

Vine only has six seconds to lampoon Palin, but thankfully she packed as much material as possible into that short time, with this unintelligible description of “Trumpeters”–Trump’s most ardent supporters.

Is Sarah Palin OK. https://t.co/MckD5il1xt

— Louis Peitzman (@LouisPeitzman) January 20, 2016

In turn, this moment has been blended with other popular Vine trends, such as poking fun at Iggy Azalea’s rapping abilities:

THE INTERNET IS SO ILL https://t.co/iw5ewaxT1J — The Kid Mero (@THEKIDMERO) January 20, 2016

And of course, a mashup, which is the only time you’ll ever see “Ciara, and Missy Elliot feat. Sarah Palin.”

omg. the internet. https://t.co/IlXyEbEBGO

— kelsey mckinney (@mckinneykelsey) January 20, 2016

One personal favorite quote from the speech is:

Trump’s candidacy has exposed, not just that tragic — that ramifications of the betrayal of a transformation of our country, but, two, he has exposed the complicity on both sides of the aisle that has enabled it, OK?

Here Palin demonstrates that she has heard several multisyllabic words before, but never took the time to read up on what they meant, or how they fit into a sentence. Twitter users chimed in on her seemingly endless tirade:

Breaking: Trump names Sarah Palin his running mate, plans to trade her in for a younger woman once he loses interest.

— OhNoSheTwitnt (@OhNoSheTwitnt) January 19, 2016

BREAKING: Sarah Palin endorses Donald Trump in 17 minute run-on sentence.

— Top Conservative Cat (@TeaPartyCat) January 19, 2016

I can relate to Sarah Palin in that I have worn tight pleather to distract people from the fact that I am a nightmare.

— Pony Starwars (@tigersgoroooar) January 20, 2016

And finally, some repurposed poetry. The candidates’ debate performances have also been given the poetic treatment.

I reformatted Sarah Palin’s Trump endorsement speech as Walt Whitman poetry. Lyrical! https://t.co/JADZlE84zJ pic.twitter.com/dugkFIqeUk

— Jason O. Gilbert (@gilbertjasono) January 20, 2016

If you’re in the mood to feel your brain melt inside your skull like ice cream in the Gobi desert, endure the full 20-minute speech at your own risk.

Sean Simon

Sean Simon is an Editorial News Senior Fellow at Law Street, and a senior at The George Washington University, studying Communications and Psychology. In his spare time, he loves exploring D.C. restaurants, solving crossword puzzles, and watching sad foreign films. Contact Sean at SSimon@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Internet Reacts to Sarah Palin’s Insane “Stump for Trump” Speech appeared first on Law Street.

If you missed Saturday’s third Democratic debate, there’s a chance you still managed to see frontrunner Hillary Clinton—or two Hillarys, rather–in action if you tuned into NBC.

Saturday Night Live veterans Tina Fey and Amy Poehler returned to their former comedic stomping ground as hosts to promote their new comedy “Sisters.” While they were there, both actresses reprised their infamous Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton impersonations in an unexpected skit that was easily the most talked about moment of the show.

The hilarious holiday sketch began with Kate McKinnon’s impersonation of Hillary falling asleep only to be awoken in a scrooge-like trance by Hillary Clinton circa 2008–aka Poehler. After catching past Hillary up on current affairs, including Benghazi and her dreaded emails, present Hillary proclaims she’s got this presidency in the bag. But only after explaining that her biggest competitors are “human Birkenstock” Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, does skeptical past Hillary believe her.

And then to make things even better, the Hillarys are joined by Fey playing a past Palin who thinks she’s stumbled into the bedroom of a lesbian couple. Priceless.

Watch the Skit Below

However, the real Sarah Palin couldn’t let Fey have all the fun at her expense. The former Alaskan Governor teamed up with conservative website Independent Journal Review to finally get back at Fey with a spoof of her own.

In the clip, Palin makes a fake “31 Rock” trailer posing as a pseudo Liz Lemon named “Lynn Melon,” who hates political correctness, spouts false Star Wars facts, and isn’t actually funny. There’s also some head scratching cameos from her former running mate John McCain and recent campaign dropout Lindsay Graham.

Watch Palin’s Spoof Below

While it’s clear Fey and Poehler’s bit was far superior, Palin’s attempt was still likable and noteworthy. She sure isn’t going to win any acting awards, but fake trailer shows she’s not afraid to get a few laughs at her own expense.

Let’s hope the political spoofs to come are all this good!

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Tina Fey, Amy Poehler Reprise SNL Spoofs, Palin Finally Gets Revenge appeared first on Law Street.

Hello, Monday, we meet again. As you trudge into a new work week, we’ve got you covered with stories you might have missed last week. Anneliese Mahoney topped the list with all three of the week’s top stories. Number one implores you to stop posting the useless copyright status to your Facebook account — seriously, it’s a waste of your time. Number two recounts Sarah Palin’s latest controversy, this time with PETA over a picture she sent out to her social media followers; and number three is a look at the bumpy legal road ahead for Uber. ICYMI, check out the best of the week from Law Street.

#1 Please Stop Posting the Facebook Copyright Status

Every now and then Facebook updates its policies. And immediately after that, I notice a series of statuses from my “friends” on Facebook. It’s a sort of notice alerting readers to the fact that the poster believes they have copyright over their own content. There are sometimes slight variations in wording, but that’s pretty much what these statuses look like every time. I’ve seen so many in my news feed over the last week that I thought it was time for an important PSA. This status means nothing. Read full article here.

#2 Sarah Palin vs. PETA: Welcome to the Overreaction Olympics

Sarah Palin has a unique place in my heart–after all, there are very few people who I can count on to continually surprise me with the weird scandals they manage to get themselves involved in. But she may have just outdone herself. The most recent Palin scandal started with a photo she posted to Facebook on New Years Day. Read full article here.

#3 Uber Will Have a Rough Ride in 2015

Uber is a great way to get from point A to point B, but the company may have a rocky road ahead of it in 2015. There are a lot of lawsuits pending against the ridesharing company, and while none of them seem that damaging, it does raise a question: why is Uber so prone to lawsuits? Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Sarah Palin has a unique place in my heart–after all, there are very few people who I can count on to continually surprise me with the weird scandals they manage to get themselves involved in. But she may have just outdone herself.

The most recent Palin scandal started with a photo she posted to Facebook on New Years Day.

Sarah Palin sparks online controversy with photos of her son standing on a dog http://t.co/UbPZKShNDIpic.twitter.com/MTQzRQIVbV

— Eyewitness News (@ABC7NY) January 3, 2015

It shows her son, Trig, standing on his service dog, Jill, in order to reach a high counter. To me, this read as a relatively innocent photo. I’m not arguing that anyone should stand on dogs–that’s not nice–but little kids climb all over animals all the time. Palin definitely should have grabbed her son rather than post a picture, but in my eyes, it’s not really that big of a deal.

But that’s where this goes from “OK, probably not the world’s best pic to post on social media” to batshit crazy in a way that only a story involving Sarah Palin and PETA can.

So, after that picture was put on Facebook, PETA released this statement:

It’s odd that anyone—let alone a mother—would find it appropriate to post such a thing, with no apparent sympathy for the dog in the photo. Then again, PETA, along with everyone else, is used to the hard-hearted, seeming obliviousness of this bizarrely callous woman, who actually thought it appropriate to be filmed while turkeys were being slaughtered right behind her in full view of the camera.

Full disclosure here–I’m not a huge fan of PETA either. I think what it stands for–an end to animal cruelty–is excellent, but I think that its reactionary policies have the potential to do more harm than good. Anyway, the group got all upset about the picture of Trig stepping on the dog, and then Palin responded with a very long letter on her Facebook page responding to the PETA statement.

Have you come down with a case of the common but exhausting “Wow-These-People-Like-To-Hear-Themselves-Talkitis” yet? Because I certainly have.

Palin’s statement started as follows:

Dear PETA,

Chill. At least Trig didn’t eat the dog.

[…]

Did you go as crazy when your heroic Man-of-Your-Lifetime, Barack Obama, revealed he actually enjoyed eating dead dog meat?

Palin is referring to Obama eating dog meat as a child when he lived in Indonesia. Palin’s ethnocentrism here is important to recognize; the difference is that Obama was eating food that was a cultural norm in the place he was living. He describes it in the same paragraph as eating snake. Furthermore, he was a nine year old. He didn’t have much autonomy in that matter–Palin as a full-grown adult had the responsibility to take her kid off the dog that he was standing on.

Moving right along through Palin’s letter, there’s a super weird part where she accuses PETA of being a hypocrite in a very strange manner, saying:

Aren’t you the same anti-beef screamers blogging hate from your comfy leather office chairs, wrapped in your fashionable leather belts above your kickin’ new leather pumps you bought because your celebrity idols (who sport fur and crocodile purses) grinned in a tabloid wearing the exact same Louboutins exiting sleek cowhide covered limo seats on their way to some liberal fundraiser shindig at some sushi bar that features poor dead smelly roe (that I used to strip from our Bristol Bay-caught fish, and in a Dillingham cannery I packed those castoff fish eggs for you while laughing with co-workers about the suckers paying absurdly high prices to party with the throw away parts of our wild seafood)? I believe you call those discarded funky eggs “caviar”.

What? I am very certain that PETA is anti-fur and anti-leather, almost rabidly so. What she’s accusing PETA of here isn’t hypocrisy but elitism. Which to be fair, I doubt that the people at PETA are struggling to put food on their tables, but the entire thing seems like a weird attack on wealthy people (and let’s remember, Palin is doing pretty well herself). So in a post about being hypocritical, Palin is hypocritical, and wow, this headache is getting pretty bad.

Honestly this entire thing is so silly and features some of the most dramatic overreactions I’ve seen in a while. So, I have some advice for both of you embroiled in this lovely little smorgasbord of misplaced outrage.

Sarah Palin: don’t let your kid stand on a dog. Or if you do, don’t post pictures of it. It’s not worth it. I know he’s probably not hurting the dog, but if you really want to be the role model that you claim to be, just be careful with the social media. Also, learn how to say “yeah, probably not my shining moment. I’m sorry,” without making it about partisan politics.

PETA: There are animals actually suffering. Pay attention to them. You just wasted manpower, outrage, and attention over a dog that is probably fed better than I am. Yet thousands of animals languish in shelters. Use your powers for good

.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Sarah Palin vs. PETA: Welcome to the Overreaction Olympics appeared first on Law Street.

Sarah Palin is fed up with the Liberal Media bias and is doing something about it. She started an online TV channel called the Sarah Palin Channel that’s going to make Fox News look like MSNBC.

I’m scared too, Catelyn.

In the introduction video, Palin says this is going to be a news channel that is going to be a lot more than news: it will get around the “media filter” and “find solutions.” Reading between the lines, Palin is saying, “The media has filtered me out, so I had to start my own channel. And I want to share my solutions that were too crazy for FOX.” In the video Palin also says that her channel will cut through “Washington DC’s phony capitalism.” So I take that to mean she will continue to call Barack Obama a socialist, while refusing to look at the actual definition of socialism.

The channel will also have very engaging guests and while she did not mention any names, a clip of Ted Cruz campaigning was rolling in the background. I thoroughly look forward to their “Who hates Obama more” and “Because the Bible told me so” segments.

Also, there is good news if you were a fan of Sarah Palin’s reality TV show. The channel will also give viewers a glance into her family’s daily life. They are just like any other American family…that has a ton of money. Watching the Palins really allows you to see how she relates to all those average Joes (read: white people) she talks so much about. And I am sure she will argue that because of her close proximity to Russia, she knows better than anyone how to deal with Putin.

Of course, if this channel is going to be more than news, it might be looking for some TV show ideas. Well, the masses have taken to Twitter to help Palin with some ideas for brilliant television. Here are some of the best:

The Big Benghazi Theory #PalinTVShows

— Lizz Winstead (@lizzwinstead) July 28, 2014

I Love Lucy But Deport Ricky #PalinTVShows

— David Corn (@DavidCornDC) July 28, 2014

America’s Funniest Stump Speeches #PalinTVShows

— CC:Indecision (@indecision) July 28, 2014

#palintvshows Everybody Loves Reagan

— James VanLaningham (@jdvanlaningham) July 28, 2014

One of the central themes of the channel, according to Palin, is that it’s about you. But there is one person the site focuses on much more than any other and I doubt that is the “you” Palin was referring to. This person is President Obama, and wow does he seem to be the main focus of the Sarah Palin Channel. Three of the seven stories on the site feature the President, and it even has a clock counting down to the end of the Obama administration. I am guessing it is a countdown to remind Palin when she will lose any relevance she might still have.

I’m laughing too, B-rock.

So in conclusion, Sarah Palin has her own TV channel because being a contributor on FOX News was too constraining for this maverick. The channel is supposedly about you, the viewer, but primarily focuses on Sarah Palin, her family, and Obama. And sadly, just in case you had any hope that this was a joke, this is not Tina Fey parodying Palin — though it can be very hard to tell the difference.

—

Matt DeWilde (@matt_dewilde25) is a member of the American University class of 2016 majoring in politics and considering going to law school. He loves writing about politics, reading, watching Netflix, and long walks on the beach. Contact Matt at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [eskimojoe via Flickr]

Matt DeWilde

Matt DeWilde is a member of the American University class of 2016 majoring in politics and considering going to law school. He loves writing about politics, reading, watching Netflix, and long walks on the beach. Contact Matt at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post America, Sarah Palin Has Her Own TV Channel appeared first on Law Street.

In an era engulfed by technology, previous ways of life have undergone a revamping. One aspect is the way in which social movements are conducted. The implementation of social media as a key tool in producing change has created “hashtag activism,” a way of protest both hailed and scorned by critics for its influence.

What is Hashtag Activism?

Hashtag activism is the act of supporting a cause that is being advocated through social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and other networking websites. Although sometimes criticized for its lack of effectiveness and promotion of lazy activism, it is the implementation of social media as a platform to raise awareness on a multitude of issues.

On September 17, 2011 the #OccupyWallStreet movement began to raise issues of economic and social inequality in the United States. Arguably one of the first major Twitter campaign, the protest mobilized thousands of people almost exclusively through the Internet. Robert Reich, former secretary of Labor under President Clinton, notes that, “Occupy put the issue of the nation’s savage inequality on the front pages” and “to that extent, it was a stirring success.” Although  with a lack of clear objectives and leadership the movement was unable to sustain long-term economic changes, #OccupyWallStreet created a new method of activism that was adopted in future campaigns.

Cases of Hashtag Activism

#Kony2012

War criminal and Ugandan military leader Joseph Kony is known for abducting children and turning them into child soldiers and sex slaves. In an effort to draw attention to his offenses Invisible Children, Inc. released a short documentary titled Kony 2012 in March of 2012, kick starting the “Stop Kony” movement that swept the United States. As of June 1, 2014 the film has over 99.5 million views on YouTube.

Americans helped contribute to the nearly 2.4 million tweets #Kony2012 accumulated in March 2012. Stimulated by the general public and celebrities alike, the United States deployed 100 military advisers to join the force of 5,000 sent by the African Union to suppress the violence in Uganda.

Abou Moussa, the U.N. Central Africa representative said, “We need to take advantage of the high level of interest, goodwill and political commitment to finally put an end to this crime.”

However, Joseph Kony remains on Forbes World’s Most Wanted Fugitives list as he has yet to be captured by the authorities.

#BringBackOurGirls

Boko Haram, a terrorist group in Nigeria, kidnapped 276 female students from their school on April 15, 2014. Since their abduction, the girls have involuntary converted to Islam and forced into marriages at the bride price of $12 dollars a piece.

Parents and activists were frantic for the government to escalate their involvement to find the missing girls, and their need to spread awareness led them to Twitter. According to BBC Trending‘s Anne-Marie Tomchack, Ibrahim M Abdullah, a lawyer in Nigeria, was the creator of the hashtag #BringBackOurGirls. The story of the abducted girls did not begin to gather attention until April 23, 2014 when Nigerians adopted the new slogan and began tweeting it.

Perhaps the Nigerian government would be able to ignore regular citizens calling for help, but once First Lady Michelle Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton got involved the issue could no longer be disregarded.

Time’s Laura Olin stated, “It’s not everything, but it’s a start. And the world is now talking about 276 stolen girls in Nigeria when before it wasn’t talking about them at all.”

Boko Haram has continued to terrorize the people of Nigeria. Since the abduction of the school girls, the militants have kidnapped even more children and murdered people in towns along the way. The Nigerian government has been all over the place with its involvement. Statements banning protests were released, followed by a quick change of heart from the administration claiming it has, “never, ever tried to violate anybody’s rights. We believe in human rights, we believe in citizens’ rights.” Allegedly the military knows where the remaining girls are, but has yet to go in due to the danger of the camp.

#YesAllWomen

On May 23, 2014, Elliot Rodger went on a killing spree near the University of California, Santa Barbara campus in Isla Vista. Six people were fatally wounded and another thirteen were injured before Rodger committed suicide in the midst of a police chase. Before the attacks began, Rodger posted alarming and irate videos to YouTube declaring his disdain of all women since they had been rejecting him throughout his life. In addition to the series of videos, he produced a 137 page autobiographical manifesto written in the same sentiment.

Although it is clear that Rodger was more vicious and vehement than most, the outlines of the prevailing misogynistic American cultural values were evident in his manifesto. Feminists could no longer stand for the perverse ideology and took to social media to let the world know.

Because being alone in a parking garage at night is one of the most terrifying experiences on earth #YesAllWomen

— jackie vasquez (@jvask) May 25, 2014

#YesAllWomen because even a taped confession admitting to raping me wasn't enough to put him in jail.

— Jessi Smiles (@jessismiles__) May 26, 2014

I shouldn't have to hold my car keys in hand like a weapon & check over my shoulder every few seconds when I walk at night #YesAllWomen

— Sophia Bush (@SophiaBush) May 25, 2014

The Twitter campaign #YesAllWomen created a place for women to share their own stories of sexism and brought attention to Rodger’s animosity toward women, that stemmed from the outlooks of our society. The New Yorker’s Sasha Weiss accurately described the moment as,

“#YesAllWomen is the vibrant revenge of women who have been gagged and silenced.”

#YesAllWomen is effective since instead of preaching to the typical feminist choir, it drew in the more mainstream population including men and celebrities. However, not all individuals were able to see the campaign for what it was and swiftly came to the defense of the male gender.

To counter #YesAllWomen, men’s rights activists were quick to tweet #NotAllMen. The thread was fashioned to establish that Rodger did not represent the entirety of the male gender; he was one of those terrible guys, not like the rest of them. #NotAllMen contributors felt the burning desire to let the world know they are not the problem and to once again push women’s issues to the back burner(if it was intended or not).

The people who tweeted #NotAllMen or believed that feminists were just on another one of their rampages missed what #YesAllWomen was intended to do. The true sentiment #YesAllWomen was expressed by CNN’s Emanuella Grinberg who said, “No, not all men channel frustration over romantic rejection into a killing spree. But yes, all women experience harassment, discrimination or worse at some point in their lives.”

As on May 26, 2014 the #YesAllWomen hashtag has reached 1.2 million tweets and 1.2 billion impressions.

 Arguments for Hashtag Activism

“Hashtag activism is a gateway between politics and popular culture, a platform to educate the ignorant and draw attention to the operation of power in the world,” stated Ben Scott in New America’s Weekly Wonk. By using a medium that is seen by millions of people daily, hashtag activism has the ability to alter a person’s attitude towards a cause by exposing them to others personal experiences and witnessing mass support. As social change is dependent on transformation at an individual level, Twitter makes itself invaluable as a campaign tool.

When victims see that others have endured the same trauma, it directly helps them as they can see that they are not alone in their pain. Even if they do not feel support by those they directly interact with in life, they know that people do care about them.

Along with the cases previously mentioned, computer-based activists also directly impacted the amount of funding for another issue they felt strongly about. Planned Parenthood annually receives $680,000 dollars from the Susan G. Komen Foundation that helps provide exams largely for minority and low income women. In January 2012, Komen announced that it would stop its funding of mammograms and breast exams through Planned Parenthood. The Internet went into an uproar, tweeting hashtags like #standwithpp and #singon. By Friday of that week, Komen had reversed its decision and stated it would continue to support Planned Parenthood.

Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, told the Los Angeles Times, “I absolutely believe the exposure on Facebook and Twitter really drove a lot of coverage by mainstream media… I’ve never seen anything catch fire [like this].”

 Arguments Against Hashtag Activism

Criticisms of hashtag activism stem from the thought that the generation that uses a social media-driven method of reform are observers, commenters, self-indulgent philanthropists – not true advocates witnessed in previous eras. CNN’s Dean Obeidallah stated that the ‘Greatest Generation’ in the 1940s and ‘50s were, “doers, not watchers.” In the ‘60s and ‘70s, the streets were flooded with protests of the Vietnam War and roared with a call for civil rights, forcing the hand of government officials to listen the people’s wishes.

Now the most common form of demonstration is retweeting another’s thoughts or giving a “like” on Facebook. Sure, online petitions are digitally signed, but the automatic signature lacks the passion displayed by movements that have come before.

Obeidallah relates the tactics of hashtag activists to the revolutionaries in the Arab world. He acknowledges that they did use social media, but their efforts did not stop there. Protesters risked their lives to achieve the change they yearned for, “All the tweets in the world would not have driven the presidents of Egypt or Tunisia from their offices,” declared Obeidallah.

Sarah Palin has also voiced her opinion on the inefficiencies of using social media to obtain success. On the former Governors Facebook page she posted a photo of a man with sheets of paper attached to his body, with hashtags scribed on them such as, “#StopLazyInternetActivism” and “#YouAreNotMakingADifference.” In regards to the abductions done by Boko Haram and the #BringBackOurGirls campaign that ensued, Palin included personal commentary in a caption:

Diplomacy via Twitter is the lazy, ineffectual, naïve, and insulting way for America’s leaders to deal with major national and international issues… If you’re going to get involved anyway, Mr. President, learn to understand this and believe it, then announce it: Victory is only brought to you ‘courtesy of the red, white and blue.’ It’s certainly not won by your mere ‘unfriending’ the bad guys on Facebook. Leading from behind is not the American way.

Evgeny Morozov, the author of “The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom, said, “My hunch is that people often affiliate with causes online for selfish and narcissistic purposes… Sometimes, it may be as simple as trying to impress their online friends, and once you have fashioned that identity, there is very little reason to actually do anything else.”

Many individuals share the impression that hashtags may come and go and they are no match for real world engagement.

Conclusion

While it cannot be denied that hashtag activism is an effective method in spreading awareness of a cause, the tangible achievements attained from physical protests perhaps outweigh those on the Internet. The absence of organization and leadership found in many Twitter-based campaigns have some people critical of the realistic capability these movements have in comparison to the street pounding tactics used during the civil rights movements. For a movement to be successful in a technology-driven generation, a combination of both civic engagement and hashtag activism would produce the best results.

 Resources

The New York Times: The Manifesto of Elliot Rodger

Washington Post: #BringBackOurGirls, #Kony2012, and the Complete, Divisive History of ‘Hashtag Activism’

Reuters: African Union Launches U.S.-Backed Force to Hunt Kony

#BBCtrending: The Creator of #BringBackOurGirls

Time: #BringBackOurGirls: Hashtag Activism Is Cheap – And That’s a Good Thing

CNN: Deadly California Rampage: Chilling Video, But No Match for Reality

New Yorker: The Power of #YesAllWomen

Time: Not All Men: A Brief History of Every Dude’s Favorite Argument

CNN: Why #YesAllWomen Took Off on Twitter

Hashtags: Social Media Users Respond to Existing Dangers Towards Women with #YesAllWomen

Weekly Wonk: #WhyHashtagActivismMatters

New Zealand Herald: Verity Johnson: Hashtag Activism – #TakeItSeriously

LA Times: Komen Learns Power of Social Media: Facebook, Twitter Fueled Fury

The New York Times: Hashtag Activism, and Its Limits

Christian Science Monitor: Happy Birthday, Occupy!

Forbes: The World’s 10 Most Wanted Fugitives

CNN: Boko Haram Blamed for Nigeria Village Attacks; 15 Killed, Chief Kidnapped

Telegraph: Nigeria: Kidnapped Schoolgirls ‘S\

Alex Hill

Alex Hill studied at Virginia Tech majoring in English and Political Science. A native of the Washington, D.C. area, she blames her incessant need to debate and write about politics on her proximity to the nation’s capital.

The post Hashtag Activism: Is it #Effective? appeared first on Law Street.

The NRA Convention happened last weekend, folks! And you know what that means.

LOTS of ridiculousness for us to talk about.

Specifically, the ridiculousness that Sarah Palin was spewing. When she addressed the cheering crowd of gun enthusiasts, she made a wildly offensive comment equating torture with Christian indoctrination.

“They obviously have information on plots to carry out jihad. Oh, but you can’t offend them. You can’t make them feel uncomfortable. Not even a smidgen. Well, if I were in charge, they would know that waterboarding is how we baptize terrorists.”

Oh sure, Sarah, that’s great. Let’s torture people and call it baptism. Because that’s not problematic AT ALL.

A lot of people, conservatives included, are pretty scandalized by this latest sound bite from the Conservative Queen of Ridiculous Sound Bites. She’s talked nonsense about President Obama being a socialist, plotting to plunge the U.S. into a quagmire of evil Communism. She’s said some weird and totally untrue things about death panels being a part of the Affordable Care Act. Not to mention, she’s been unable to pinpoint any specific news publications that she reads, or to be completely in control of the English language — “refudiate” and “misunderestimate” are cases in point.

But! Despite the fact that we should all be totally used to Sarah Palin spewing nonsense, she really outdid herself this time.

Even Lucy is shocked.

Let’s start with the most glaring and obvious issue here — Palin is talking about TORTURE. This isn’t an enhanced interrogation method. This isn’t even fucking legal.

Waterboarding is torture.

And she’s talking about it pretty fucking brazenly. She’s blasé about it, really. Palin talks about torturing people with the same folksy, nonchalant charm that won her a spot on the presidential ticket back in 2008. She could be talking about her kid’s hockey game, for cryin’ out loud.

But she’s not. She’s talking about subjecting human beings to the experience of simulated drowning.

And that’s really disturbing. When a person can talk about torturing other people with such ease, it makes you wonder what they’re really capable of. And I’m not the only one who’s wondering.

The Atlantic’s Conor Friedersdorf brings up an important point—what happens if the wrong Republican gets elected? Will the United States revert back to its Bush Era, barbaric ways? Will torture become the norm once again? What else will become the norm?

Potentially, a lot of scary things. Keep in mind, Palin is a self-professed, devout Christian. She’s a woman who claims to follow the gospel of Jesus Christ — a prophet who preached peace and love above all else. I mean, let’s be real. Dude was the original hippy, am I right?

Yup.

So if she can justify torture — even when she follows a religion that, at its core, preaches peace — what else can she justify?

For starters, she can justify a blatant disrespect for the religion that she claims to cling to so tightly. Her conflation of waterboarding with baptism has been received with a lot of insult and outrage by many in the Christian community. Rod Dreher, the editor of the American Conservative, even termed the comparison “sacrilegious.”

So what are we left with? Sarah Palin has proven herself time and time again to be a lightning rod for controversy. She says crazy things. She does weird shit like deviate from her political career to star on reality shows. She gets a lot of flak.

And some of that flak isn’t well deserved. There’s always been an element of misogyny to the criticism hurled at Palin. The world collectively freaked out when she was announced as John McCain’s running mate back in 2008 — and not because she was wildly unqualified — but because she was a woman, a former beauty queen, a mother of five children. How can she be a heartbeat away from the presidency, the country asked, but not always for the right reasons.

But now? We’re left with a woman who talks about violence with reckless abandon. Who preaches her own religious and political views dogmatically, without actually following them herself. Who panders to crowds of gun-enthusiasts who cheer her on when she talks about torture.

That shit’s dangerous. So what’ll happen if the wrong Republican gets elected?

It’s impossible to say — but one thing’s for sure. Nothing good happens when you give people with a penchant for violence and self-righteousness the keys to the kingdom.

—

Hannah R. Winsten (@HannahRWinsten) is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow.

Featured image courtesy of [Gage Skidmore via Wikipedia]

Hannah R. Winsten

Hannah R. Winsten is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Can We Maybe Not Condone Torture, Sarah Palin? appeared first on Law Street.