Friday, August 14, 2009

The Cornerstone - Questions and Answers

One question that has come up repeatedly in comments is the idea that Bristol was breastfeeding and some sort of forced weaning could have accounted for that amount of enormous breast change she evinced OR she was padded so heavily to hide any leakage.

Here's my read on that. This is something I feel very confident discussing since I worked as a lactation consultant for fifteen years and also nursed four children of my own.

Considering the number of bottles you see around Trig (there seems to be one in virtually every photograph) I doubt very much if he was breastfeeding as of August 2008. Someone, however, may have been pumping breast milk and bottle feeding it to him. This is not uncommon for Down Syndrome babies, who typically have a very hard time learning to nurse, and often seem to "forget how" between feedings.

Could that lactating mom have been Bristol? Possibly but more importantly, could that account for the enormous bust we see on the night of September 3, 2008? Here's my answer: I doubt it. When mothers who are nursing stop abruptly, breasts do swell and leak, but most importantly become very sore and tender.

I foolishly once separated myself from my 2 1/2 year old nursing toddler for about 40 hours. I should have known better since I was already a Lactation Consultant, but you know what they say about shoemaker's kids. I had to go to a funeral, it was two flights each way, then driving in cars, then mom is crying, and the idea of doing all that with a 2 1/2 year old was daunting. He'll be fine, I reassured myself. And he's not nursing that much. No problem.

Well, HE was fine. I, however, was not. By the time I got back home, about 40 hours after I left, I ached so badly that I could barely lift my arms to drive the car. The least jounce of the country road was excruciating. I had tried to express milk, most notably in an airport restroom stall (didn't want to shock anyone by trying to do it into a sink) but with limited success. (And this was all the more ludicrous since I rented electric breast pumps in conjunction with my LC practice so I had any equipment I could have desired to take with me already in my house.)

Contrast again these pictures, this one of Bristol taken on (or around) August 24,

Then this one, taken around September 1,

with this one taken on September 3rd.

There is no way that weaning, no matter how forced or abrupt could account for a change in breast size of this magnitude. Furthermore, I have watched every video I can find of this night. Bristol moves easily and naturally, waves at people, hands Trig to her mother then takes him back again with ease. She seems happy and comfortable. There is NO sign of any extreme discomfort. Believe me if your breasts had suddenly turned into hot tender rocks, you wouldn't be waving to the crowd with a smile on your face.

What about padding? Your typical breast pad, worn by most new mothers to prevent leaking, is about three inches across and is made of very absorbent material. They are small, discrete and effective. It's called "leaking," not "rupture." Unless they padded her with bath towels, there is no plausible way to account for this amount of sheer "mass."

The question of the dates.

Numerous people have suggested that Bristol was padded or enhanced in some way to make her look MORE pregnant. Here's the problem with that line of thinking.

Bristol Palin appeared in public on Sunday February 8th, 2009. While she definitely looked as if she might have had a baby "recently," it's hard to imagine her being less than ten days "post partum." So let's assume just for the sake of conversation, that Bristol Palin had actually given birth to Tripp on January 30th.

Why lie about this being her due date? January 30th was still too close to April 18th to allow Bristol to be the mother of both children. If this was her real actual due date there would have been no reason to lie about it.

According to one medical text I consulted, the shortest recorded time between birth and ovulation is 27 days. The mean time is 70 days (so more than two months) for non nursing women and 190 days (more than six months) for nursing moms. However, most texts I looked at agreed anything less than six weeks for a non nursing mom is pretty rare. Just for discussion, let's assume that a baby was born on April 18th, and then the mom ovulated 42 days later. That would have given a due date of Feb 21st. (Yes, there are reports of babies being born much closer than that... but in those cases, the second baby is premature.)

But we know for a fact that Bristol was not pregnant on Feb 7th, and was out and about in public. Furthermore, journalist John Ziegler states he saw Bristol in the Palin home on January 7th and states she was post partum. I believe he would know the difference between "post partum" and nine months pregnant and ready to pop. I also believe that while some journalists have shown themselves willing to not see things or just not ask the right questions, I find it difficult to believe that Ziegler would actually lie about something like that. The consequences of blatantly putting forth an untruth for a journalist would be career-ending. So therefore I tend to believe that John Ziegler did see Bristol on Janaury 7th, and to his eye she was not pregnant at that point.

So, I believe it's implausible that they padded Bristol to make her look MORE pregnant, just as it was unnecessary that they lie about the second birth date. If she was due to deliver any time before Feb 1, they did not need to. Why take the risk, either risk? Any birth before about the 15th of February would have "proved" that Bristol could not be the mother of both children.

One other comment mentioned these three additional shots of Bristol, all from during the campaign. I left them out of the first post primarily because of length but will add them here.

They are:

This was taken when Sarah visited a Wal-Mart on October 14th.

This was taken the following Saturday, October 18th.

This was taken the morning of the election, November 4th.

Again, I don't feel that they show a very solid "progression" of pregnancy, but that is my opinion alone, and I will be the first to concede that this proves nothing.

I don't know what to tell people about this mystery. I think I've made it clear that my jury is out on this whole issue. I am NOT saying that Bristol Palin's pregnancy in late 2008 was faked. I am NOT saying even that it was not exactly as reported.

I am saying that photographic evidence shows a pregnancy that does not appear to progress normally. Photographic evidence shows unequivocally that her bustline was padded at an event where there would be no plausible or rationale reason to do so. Common sense screams that something is wrong with the whole way the birth was presented.

It all makes my head hurt.


Anonymous said...

This post is much clearer. Thanks, Audrey.

If I follow you. . .

Supposing Trig was born much earlier than his announced birthdate. Sarah delayed "her birth" to accomodate the events she wanted to attend to garner attention for the nomination. So Bristol is kept with Trig, in isolation, until Sarah is ready to announce his birth.

Then Bristol shows up pregnant a second time. Sarah is livid. She fears it will ruin her nomination, so they keep the second pregnancy secret. The kids marry. But then the rumors start swirling about Sarah not having given birth to Trig. AND by this time, the rumors of Bristol being pregnant are starting to seep out.

Sarah does not tell the McCain campaign any of this -- until the last moment. She decides to use Bristol's pregnancy to hide her own non-pregnancy-- but has to lie about the #of mo. along or it doesn't scotch the SP/Trig rumor because Sarah has faked the birthdate. Kill two birds with one stone.

And the bolster in the dress is a last minute, crazy thing to draw our eye away from Bristol's belly. Which it did. All you could see was that enormous weird breast.

So then, what if Bristol delivered Tripp earlier, not later? November?

I'm not an accurate dates person. But my idea is that the bolstered breast was meant to draw our eye AWAY from Bristol's belly.

wayofpeace said...

OT but it's SO GOOD for a TGIF:

Gryphen's six pieces of advice for his ex-Governor:

1) Don't incite hate against the President. He won the election, you didn't, and acting this way just make you look petty and hateful.

2) Don't keep using your children as props. It does not make you look warm and motherly, it makes you look creepy and manipulative.

3) Don't blame all of your mistakes on others. Eventually there will be so many bodies thrown under that bus that it will be too high centered for its wheels to even touch the ground. Then what will you do?

4) Don't Facebook. Even if you hire a room full of ghostwriters the messages coming from that source make you sound less like a future leader and more like a spoiled teenager complaining to the world that nobody likes her because they are all jealous of her good looks and cool clothes. This is not how serious adults get their messages heard.

5) Don't twitter, it makes you sound insane.

6) And finally, just don't bother.

You are finished.

The media knows it.

Alaskans know it.

The Republican party knows it.

Even Todd knows it.

The only ones who don't know it are you, your small group of crazy ass sycophants, and people who still think they can make a buck off of you.

Do yourself a favor, prioritize your family, make some money with public appearances, and try to find some peace. Learn to like yourself again, and perhaps you will be able to break your addiction to the limelight and accept that you have value even if the world is not looking at you.

Sandia Blanca said...

Someone on an earlier thread asked if there have been any photos published of Trig and Tripp together. We know for sure that Trig exists; do we know that about Tripp?

hrh said...

SP has achieved whatever success she lays claim to by using her brashness and ruthlessness, not by possessing and using intelligence or charm. Most of the lies we know about are desperate improvisations to cover up a previous lie when it is exposed.

As far as the head-scratchers (padded bust, wild ride, etc) go, attempting to decipher them using "Sense & Sensibility" certainly can make one's head hurt!

jeanie said...


Another excellent post. I have a comment that I hate to think about, but given that we are talking about Sarah here, you might want to consider all the possibilities:

You said: "Let's assume that a baby was born on April 18th, and then the mom ovulated 42 days later. That would have given a due date of Feb 21st."

True, and it's also generally accepted that a delivery is considered 'pre-term' only before 37 weeks. Inducing on or about January 30th would have put Bristol right in the 37 week range. If tests had shown that the lung-development was sufficient, and that the weight was normal, it's conceivable that Sarah felt that this was not a huge risk.

I hate to think of anyone going to such lengths, and I would REALLY hate to think that some doctor might be willing to go along with it, but as far as 'possible scenarios', this one should be put out there for consideration.

Cafe Campesino said...

Keep it up, Audrey. This story continues to beg so many questions. Maybe the answers will finally appear and be clear to all. And even the Palinbots will know the truth about their Queen Sarah. Let's hope so. Keep up the good work.

pearlygirl said...

you are being wise and fair in your analysis---just asking for answers to explain several oddities.

Bristol's famous "bolster" dress does seem to be pointless---why pad? why let her wear that dress---there are lots of people involved who could/should have encouraged "the proper attire" Even Levi was cleaned up. However, there is the possibility that she was wearing a push up bra or something else sexy underneath for Levi. He was coming down to see her and we were all teenagers once. Some such things are a bit "over padded" and can look really odd. I had one that was refered to as "the airbag bra" in case of accidental crashes. Very fake considering my natural form but worn all in good fun.

I don't want to get into speculation about what anyone does behind closed doors but it is a possiblity to explain the extreme and somewhat temporary profile.

Oh dear, my WV is prene as in "preen"?

Dreamer said...

I almost have to agree with Alex here, especially after seeing that HUGE baby (Tripp?) on the Greta show. The way she draped that totally drugged baby over knees, it seemed like he could have been easily 2-3 months old.
That, on the other hand, would definitely mean that Trig would have to have been born way earlier.

On the other hand, who can believe Ziegler anyway? How many of the media have mistaken Bristol for Willow, and one of their cousins for either one of these young girls?

B said...

Good point. But at least one of the fake pregnancy belly pads has a padded bra component. I remember a picture where it appeared that Bristol could be wearing that at the RNC, but the bra cups were smushing her own flesh up against her chest. An unintended poorly fitting bra is more likely than a push-up bra.

B said...

There was a picture of Levi with TriPP that had another baby's arm showing, as if Levi were holding both babies. There were two babies in Bristol's Greta interview in February. I think there have been other photos. Pretty sure there are two babies.

B said...

You're right, Audrey, that Sarah didn't have to pick an earlier due date for TriPP just to rule out Bristol giving birth to TriG. But that would have required research and logic. Sarah took a much less nuanced approach: April 18 (TriG's alleged birthdate) + 8 mos. = December 18 original TriPP due date, because everyone knows 8 < 9, and 9 would not be conclusive enough.

B said...

There was also a photo of Bristol backstage at the SNL set where she looked pregnant.

Maybe after Bristol saw herself look so large and misshapen in the RNC photos, she reacted by losing weight, and that caused her size and her belly's size not to progress in a typical way. She also could have worn more layers of clothing over her belly at different times.

As for Ziegler, people have suggested that he may have seen Willow and mistaken her for a non-pregnant Bristol. Or, Sarah could have had her niece who resembles Bristol be there for Ziegler to see. Importantly, he did not see a newborn.

Saw the cover of Globe at the grocery tonight and, like Star, it had the Palin divorce story. I did not have time to see the story.

Silvergirl said...

I think that Bristol's dress at the convention just was a bad choice. Perhaps she was wearing a push up bra with too much padding, and it did not look right in that dress.

Whoever helped her pick out her dress did a big disservice to her, as it was not flattering at all. As a matter of fact, I don't think anyone would look good in that gray dress. With so many nice maternity dresses out there, I wonder why they choose to dress her that way.

WV: ables

Molly said...

Well, it sure makes it hard to come to any conclusions when it is so difficult to establish anything as a given!! If we could start with just one fact that is indisputable, it would surely help!

You said in there about unless towels were used as padding....well, yeah, that is sorta what it looks like! Imagine a really padded bra insert, perhaps like what one finds inside swimsuits? and add some extra nursing pads in there, not just one for each side.......but then, she just looks SO ridiculous I can't believe anyone allowed her to go out on stage like that!! At some point, speculation was that perhaps she was wearing an "empathy belly" under the dress to make her look farther along than she was, and those, if I remember corrrectly, come with big padded bras. It might also explain the whole ill-fitting gestalt. I know previously I posted somewhere that maybe Sarah made her wear the one she had used in April of 2008. (Although maybe in B's case she put it on upside down and got the belly part in the bra part....LOL)

Would they have fudged her due date at the time of the convention by only a month? Well, since 'five months along' was what they needed at the time to rule her out as 4 1/2 month old (who looked like maybe actually 6 months old) Trig's mother....that gave them just enough leeway to 'prove' (given April 18th Trig b-day) Bristol wasn't his mother. Sarah ASSUMED no one would ever dare question that birth date--or the circumstances surrounding the event.

But then again, another part of me says we're all nuts and Trig is Sarah's and Bristol gave birth on Dec 26...27..28th? Argggghhhh.

And the Pringles I'm eating are not helping matters any.

I really really think a Big Clue to this whole mystery is Bristol's words in her Greta interview upon finding out/letting her parents know that she was pregnant with Tripp..."We were ALL surprised." Yeah, every last one of those Palins and Johnstons were ALL surprised that Bristol and Levi got pregnant again so quickly!!

Ginger said...

Hi Audrey,

Thanks for your continuing effort to bring out the truth!

All this talk about Bristol's breast size during the RNC, has given me a headache.

I haven't posted in quite-a-while because I have made many posts already that have told my side of the theory. We all know Sarah did not give birth to Trig.

Everyone is still massaging the dates to fit in the birth of Tripp.
I don't know how many times I have tried to explain that a 16/17 year old girl does not turn around and get pregnant again. Unless, possibly, the person is mentally challenged.

There is so much trauma involved in giving birth at that age, the thought of getting PG again is inconceivable. And, with a mother like Sarah, I can just imagine the pain Bristol went through.

Every day I read your blog...keep up the good work!

pearlygirl said...

I forgot to add that Bristols dress that night was pretty conservative and not really a bad dress in and of itself--very traditional cut and material---it's just the tight fit that makes it look bad. On the hanger it would have easily gotten a green light for sarah's debut, but who checks out what "personal" items that she would wear underneath especially given her age.

There's a reason why both push up bras and/or Spanx are so popular. A little help to make the outfit work for you in all the right places. However, the wrong underpinnings can really break the line of an outfit and make it look just ill-fitting and awful. It could be just a bad wardrobe choice rather than any intentional reason.

Eileen said...

Vogue photographers from late Fall 2007 who went to Wasilla to shoot Palin as Gov...they should have taken hundred plus shots. Who are they? Did they come from East Coast or hired in No.W/Alaska? Do they own the originals? The rights or does the magazine? Can they be brave enough to revisit these images of a non-public so-called pregnant Sarah? Some magazines should love to extend a popular story line-even if this one is not as blemish free as a runner fluff piece. Vogue or the photographers could take the unpublished shots and have investigative writer do a follow-up. The angle is endless: Prez. campaign/resignation, babies,rise to national political statute, intrigue, political controversy,Northern woman Repub. 21st century'feminist' mystique, sex appeal sells mags as various members of family take good photos, blah blah. So listening National mags?-do a photo essay time line on Sarah's changing physique and even with with fluff writing....the Babygate story will sell more issues than you could imagine-more than Birther intrigue!
Use these blogs for your investigation-we ALL know MSM is scanning these blogs and making hard thinking folks like Audrey, Morgan, Dan and many others do YOUR legwork on Babygate.

Did she re-assign the Gov. mansion chef due to not living in Juneau or because a full time-home based employee would have SEEN TOO much?

Where in Alaska can you go out and buy these Empathy bellies retail? Could someone just get one regionally and set up that Gutsy photo session or would it have to be special order/internet?
Are there more Palin pals or relatives with school employee contacts where these empathy belly props are used in Sex Education classes? Pals like Dr. Cathy Baldwin.
Oops-that's right, Sarah doesn't believe in that subject in Health class so wouldn't have access to school provided prop...Maybe Sarah had to go to a Planned Parenthood and borrow it for the fake big belly shot-seen arund the nation.Ha!
What goods can be put on Dr. Baldwin to tell the truth since she took a legal oath-just like the Michael Jackson doctors' problems?

anne s said...

One more example of Sarah's extreme selfishness...see a little envy of her young, beautiful daughter?

S.P. got to look thin and svelte, with "rock hard abs" ..a fluffy scarf and no one even suspected a thing!

Her daughter had to look like a bloated whale

leu2500 said...

Sandia Blanca - I believe that Trigg & Tripp were on screen together for a time in the Feb 09 Greta Van Sustern interview.

vera city said...

I started this comment before Audrey posted again. It is funny how they reenforce each other.

My two bits added. Bristol Palin may have been breast feeding and/or pregnant at the RNC. Or she may have been in neither of those states based on the pictures taken. Because what is clear and indisputable is that she was padded for the evening to such an alarming degree that Audrey's outrage of the treatment of Bristol should be a majority opinion. Whoever forced Bristol into that outfit was being maliciously cruel. It far exceeded the point, that we should believe that Bristol was five months pregnant, that Sarah Palin was trying to make.

I defy anyone to show me a photo of a young, slender woman, five months pregnant, whose breasts are as large as that. To make it easier, I won't even stipulate that the woman's unpregnant breast size should be a B cup or less. In my own experience, I am normally well endowed (34F). When my milk first came in, my breasts were the largest that the midwives and various other birthing professionals had ever seen. (No sniggers please.) And even then I was not as large as Bristol in the RNC photos and would have required a fair amount of padding to get to that size.

If we were to swallow the hook and believe that those were Bristol's breasts, instead of what they really resembled - a down pillow stuffed in the top of a dress, we would have to acknowledge that the dress was significantly compressing the 'breasts' by pushing them together and upwards - swelling the upper part of her chest. If they were real breasts, they would be even bigger once she took the dress off. Let's just forget about finding any clothes, other then a muumuu, which would close properly over such an expansive chest. Yet in every other photo we have of Bristol the clothes do exactly that. You can't even see a swell of any breast in the picture of Bristol in a sweat shirt ten days before and the vest she wears afterwards is loose across her chest - no curve even registers through the fabric.

By the way, if anyone gets squeamish about discussing a seventeen year old girl's breasts, remind them that we are actually analysing a pillow.

The strange body that Bristol was forced to wear at RNC was a one off event. Interestingly the photos of the weirdly pregnant Bristol became public the same week, or was it within days, that the Gutsy photos of a suddenly pregnant Sarah Palin became available on the internet - the only photo that shows a undeniably pregnant belly, but most probably not a real one. I would strongly suggest that the two events are linked together. (Remember that, due to the work of the other Morgan and others, we know that the Gutsy photo had been significantly altered. It was also Morgan's analysis of the photographs that hit a nerve with Sarah Palin: leading to her flagging Morgan for the harassment that resulted in the shutting down of Morgan's site.)

Sarah Palin had a problem - the rumours around Trigg's birth - and her two prong rebuttal to that shows up within days of each other. A photograph showing her in a real pregnancy empathy belly, which she didn't seem to own back in the Spring of 2008. The empathy belly only appears in this altered pictured released months later, the rest of the time she used improvised padding - even in Texas. And the overly padded daughter displayed in public and national television for one night. It is the same idea executed badly both times. (It should be noted that care was taken to have Sarah look nice in the Gutsy photo while Bristol was made to look humiliatingly grotesque.) And, yes, she really does think that we are so stupid that we wouldn't notice, which is a common trait for people who score high on the Psychopathy Checklist - they think that they are extremely clever and we won't catch on to the obvious discrepancies.

word verification: onfor as in on for another post from Vera.

jeanie said...

Vera City said: "By the way, if anyone gets squeamish about discussing a seventeen year old girl's breasts, remind them that we are actually analysing a pillow."

Very nicely put, Vera City! Since we're losing what may have been left of our squeamishness, I would like to point out another thing.

Audrey, I defer to your expertise about almost all of this lactation stuff, but I have to take issue when you said "Your typical breast pad, worn by most new mothers to prevent leaking, is about three inches across and is made of very absorbent material. They are small, discrete and effective."

The main word I disagree with here is 'effective'. I am very NOT well-endowed and when I was nursing, I used these pads with very little effect. If I started leaking, I was a sopping mess before too long. If I'd had to go to a really important function where I would have been on display for hours and no way to get to a bathroom and change those pads, I would have needed some major towels or pillows stuffed in there for assurance.

So if Bristol was indeed nursing, I think it was very likely that her 'handler' just wanted to be VERY sure that she wouldn't leak.

Keith said...

While I find the whole baby story interesting, the logical side of me says if there were even a crack of solid evidence Palin were not pregnant, it would be investigatively reported by a major news source. Reporters won't touch this subject. Why? They see nothing there. I'm not saying I agree with them, but it seems to me the potential of this all blowing up in Palin's face rests with convincing just one investigative reporter there is solid reason to investigate. What we need is for one major blogger site to encourage other blog sites, and readers, to bombard the networks with emails requesting an investigation of Palin's birth story. Just one major reporter, willing to be involved, could produce the next Watergate. Organize us; we're waiting for a leader!

On a side note, in the first photo, "smallfair.gif," I was amused by Sarah's shoes. All others are casually dressed. All others have shoes consistent with the dress. Sarah's shoes are totally out of place -- just like Sarah's persona on the political stage.

NakedTruth said...

In the grocery store looking at the picture of Bristol and Levi at the RNC and it appears that Star has a picture of the two at an angle we have not seen. I swear it looks like Bristol has some kind of bandage around her waist - similar to that thing Sarah had around her waist in Andrea's 'nail in the coffin' picture. Strange.

Also, it does look a little bit like Willow in those Star pictures. I hope not.

wayofpeace said...

a thought:

what if we design a triptych graphic for the PD home page thus:

first image on the left side of SARAH from MARCH '08 with barely a bump, in the center a woman wearing an empathy belly (with a + sign in between the 2), and then the GUSTY image (with an = sign in between).

we could do the same for BRISTOL's RC photo, except for hers, the faux belly will have padded bra.

SunSweet said...

I beg to differ with the poster who said "a teenager does not turn around and get pregnant again unless she is mentally challanged. Pregnant teenagers are at high risk of subsequent teenage conceptions, with approximately one fifth of teenage pregnancies being to a teenager who has conceived previously.
Google is a wonderful tool

Anonymous said...

Amen, Vera City and Anne S.

You nail it. Bristol sacrificed, humiliated.

Imagine how she felt to see herself later in those photos. In the hysteria of the moment, she may have bowed to her mom's wishes. ("You owe me, Bris!")

But later to see the image of yourself-- well, haven't we all experienced that. You think you look just fine, and then you see a photo and realize you don't!

The Editor said...

I think Trigg was born in late January 2008. Bristol was tucked away from the family so that Piper would not spill the beans. Bristol got knocked up again and Sarah decided to be "pregnant" with Trigg because the GOP was sniffing around her as a possible VP candidate. So, if she can "give birth" to a special needs child and force Bristol to have an abortion (that's where the "He was my choice" comment comes from,) then she's golden. The crazy "wild ride" story resulted when Sarah's father didn't get the memo - or the script right. She probably planned to "have" the baby just after she returned from Texas, but her father somehow got it all mixed up. Bristol then decided against the abortion and Sarah tried to keep Bristol's second pregnancy under wraps until she was tapped by the McCain campaign. I doubt very much if they would have chosen her had they known about Bristol's pregnancy. Bristol's unfortunate wardrobe choice may have been to cover up her leaking breasts - or not. I think Tripp's birth date could be accurate, but there certainly is a veil of secrecy around that as well. These deceptions are what caused the end of the Palin marriage. Too many lies to remember; so little time.

sandra said...

Remember the GVS interview with Bristol? That was the first time we saw "Tripp." At the time we remarked that no one called him by name. Sarah introduced him as a "bundle of joy."

What sticks in my mind was tah Bristol was holding the baby and then Trig was brought out. He seemed very curious about the baby, and Bristol said, "Trig. See the baby?" After two months in the household I would expect them to be using Tripp's name, especially to Trig.

We have seen Tripp frequently and in the company of Trig, e.g., double stroller.

back porch said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sarah Q. said...

Sandra says: We have seen Trig and Tripp frequently in a double stroller. Really?

Maybe it's just one time and maybe it was setup that way for the purpose. The Palins would easily go to that length in order to obfuscate the issue. Try to always keep that in mind. This is especially relevant to anything else observed with the Palins because they are desperate to keep up the facade. Keep in mind that any pictures of Bristol or Sarah or other Palins that are available now, later, or for quite some time back are being seen because it is planned that they are seen. In most cases at least and therein lies much of the confusion on the timing of Bristol's pregnancy.

sandra said...

Sarah Q: Please note that I had an "e.g." in front of the double stroller. At the resignation picnics we saw Bristol with Tripp and Todd with Trig. There are two babies.

Back Porch: I put Tripp in quotation marks because we were discussing the idea that it might not really have been Tripp. There was no intention to make fun of the names.

My, we seem to have degenerated into more argument than conversation. Maybe we need some moderation. (Maybe I need some moderation.)

sew what? said...

Audrey said:
"Why would you pad/enhance the bust of a young woman who is genuinely pregnant? It is what it is. If she's really pregnant, why would it even occur to anyone to make her look more pregnant? If Bristol pregnancy was "as reported" on September 5th, in due time, the baby would be born, the veracity of the Palin/McCain's statements to the press would be born out."

Like most of those commenting here, I am baffled by the bolstered bustline. But keep in mind that Palin and the McCain campaign were desperate to refute the rumor that SP was not Trig's mom before the election. And no doubt they wished to squelch the rumor ASAP so it wasn't a distraction during the campaign. So that would be a reason to try and make it appear that Bristol was more pregnant than she really was -- they couldn't wait until end of December to prove their point. Most importantly, it worked! Except for Andrew Sullivan at the Daily Dish, "name" journalists and the MSM have ignored the story.

I wouldn't really trust Ziegler's word. Even if he didn't mistake Willow or a cousin for Bristol, he could claim so later if need be!

Keith: The fact that the MSM has been silent on the story doesn't convince me that there's nothing to it. Look at the case of John Edwards and his affair -- the National Enquirer put out quite a bit of information about it long before it was finally acknowledged and the MSM ignored the story. Not until the National Enquirer had evidence that John met up with his mistress at a hotel did the MSM get involved.

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

Thanks for all of the analysis. IMHO, when the day comes in which both birth dates, of TriG and TriPP, what's left of $P's reputation is shot to hell. Lying about not one, but two, birth dates makes people ask the inevitable question, "If $P will lie about this, what else would she lie about?"

Enormously saddening to me, as others have pointed out, are a) the emphasis placed by BP and Levi on the fact that TriPP is "healthy," and b) that the healthy infant is a boy. Would Levi be as excited about his offspring had they been girls? I'd like to think so: Levi seems like an honest, well-intentioned young man who got way way WAY over his head. However, I am the issue of extremely misogynistic parents; even in presumably more enlightened times, when I became a mother, I witnessed overt envy of my husband (not of me, of my husband) by men who wanted either sons, or more than one son.

B said...

Go to and search for Bristol Palin.

In the string of gray dress photos, I notice that the dress hangs better on Bristol when she is on stage than when she is at her chair, particularly in her chair. Even clapping her hands may affect how the dress fits her. The RNC people probably approved the dress for her when she was standing and the dress wasn't creased.

I also notice in some of the pictures of her sitting (4, 19, 32) that the lines of the top of the bra cups appear visible and low on her chest, suggesting that the bolster is her flesh that is backed up behind a bra that is too small to fit. Could be the bra portion of the fake pregnancy pads.

But if you look at the fourth day pictures, the so-called madonna and child string, Bristol wears a lower-cut, empire waist black dress that emphasizes her belly but is flattering. Despite the slimming black, she definitely looks pregnant and big breasted, without the bolster appearance. It would be harder to pad the top of this dress. This dress doesn't change my opinion that the bolster in the gray dress is large amounts of her own flesh pushed upward by a too-small bra.

I cannot reconcile this body with hers a few weeks prior, though she likely would have been dressing to conceal, rather than emphasize, a pregnancy then. Still, I believe Bristol was pregnant and had TriPP eventually. I do not believe there was a stunt baby or an adoption.

stacey said...

in this gallery, dated August 30th, 2008:

Trig would have been a little more than 4 months old here. He looks much larger and older than 4 months old...especially for a baby who was supposedly born premature.

Lynn said...

Too bad we don't have a Bristol double and a Sarah double to experiment with and see what it would take to result in the images we have seen. Exactly how a scarf would look over pregnant bellies at various stages. How much padding would it take to fill a dress to that degree.

Audrey or editor, are you saying that Chuck Heath put out that foot-in-mouth comment about amniotic fluid leaking before the story of the wild ride appeared? If so, that's really interesting. Any good chronology needs to account not only for when things happened or "happened" but also when the news first appears.

sew what? said...

Dreamer -- I think you might be confusing Bristol's interview with Greta VS with her Today Show appearance. On Greta's show, Tripp is far from huge and Bristol holds him in the crook of her arm and up to her shoulder, not across her knees (the interview was done mid-February). It was on the Today Show that a sleeping baby Tripp lay across Bristol's knees for the whole interview. The Today Show interview was on May 6th, I think -- so Tripp would have been over four months old if he was born at the end of December.

My word verification: trightu
I think it's a clue! Gotta figure out what 'htu' might mean...ha ha

mel said...

Looking at those pix at mccainblogette...and many others of SP w/ Trig (see Palingates for an series of photos), I'm asking: why does she always have her harpy fingers in his face? Poking his cheeks or lips as if to, what, wake him up? make him think he's getting fed? Startle him? Make him taste your fresh manicure? Does she really think a finger in the face is enjoyable? I don't know, maybe it makes him giggle. But I don't get it. Never have. Kind of makes me angry/queasy each time I see it.

Doubting Thomas said...

On the front page of the HuffPo back on July 5th, there was a AP picture of Bristol pushing a double stroller with 2 babies in it (I saved the picture, link below). Sarah and Todd are with her. Why would she own a double stroller if she only has one baby?? If their story is true, Sarah should be pushing her baby Trig in his own stroller and Bristol should be pushing Tripp in his? Right?? But, if Bristol has 2 babies, then a double stroller would be a very practical thing to have. Very interesting picture...

[img][/img] or

And if anybody doesn't think Bristol pushing a twin stroller with two babies in it isn't f****** weird, then please explain it to me. It reminds me of those blended polygamist compounds where the children don't know who their real mom is, but what the hell.

If Trig weren't yours, then wouldn't you just want to be with your OWN kid for a change than looking like the family nanny all the time.

hmmmmmmmm. . .

KaJo said...

I've always thought that the gray sheath dress Bristol wore at the RNC was one that she had no choice but to wear, and that the style was chosen on purpose to emphasize her belly. I think whoever picked out the dress, though, didn't take into account her already large bosom (if the Sept. 2007 pictures are any indication) inflated even a bit more by pregnancy. They ended up shoe-horning a size 16 bust into a size 4 dress. I'll bet there was a LOT of strain on the dress's zipper!

Back porch, maybe you're late to the discussion, but regarding the emphasis on TriG and TriPP that you objected to -- speaking for myself, I'd done that just to make very clear which baby I'm talking about, in a discussion thread where we've seen the two infants called Trig, Trigg, Trip, Tripp and the two names used interchangeably at random between the two infants.

Dee said...

John Ziegler is not a Journalist, he is a rightwing commentator who has zero credibility. He produced a documntary which attempted to make Palin look like a brillant, ethical politician who was crucified by the "liberal" media. He has interested in making Palin look good, not the truth, and nothing he has to say on the Palins is off any value. He has no Journalistic reputation to loose, and is free to be say whatever he wants.

One of the problems with trying to figure out what happened is that we are all trying to find logical reasons for the strange events that unfolded. Yet, we are not dealing with rational actors, and it is quite possible that there was no good reason for many things that happened. For all we know Brisol decided her dress would look better if she made her chest bigger and stuffed it, not realizing how much bigger and unreal they looked to the camera. Or perhaps, she was annoyed with her mother pushing her around and did it out of spite, knowing she looked odd. I know the first time I saw her on TV during the Convention, I wondered what she had stuffed down her dress and rewound to look at her, and I know plenty of other people who did as well. It could be that it had nothing to do with her attempting to look pregnent. To me the biggest proof that something is wrong is that there is no independent proof that Tripp was ever born, much less when.

wayofpeace said...

what president OBAMA said in CO today:

"What you can't do, or you can, but you shouldn't do -- is start saying things like we want to set up death panels to pull the plug on grandma."

President Obama paused and grew emotional, "First of all, when you make a comment like that, I just lost my grandmother last year... I know what its like to watch somebody you love, who's aging, deteriorate...

"When you start making arguments like that, that's simply dishonest. Especially when I hear the arguments coming from members of congress in the other party, who, it turns out, sponsored similar provisions!"

herkimer said...

Somewhat OT...

I have thought of Eunice Shriver over the past few days: her founding of and ongoing devotion to Special Olympics and those wonderful athletes.

I wondered if our girl Sarah would acknowledge Mrs. Shriver. (She has used TriG and his health condition as a prop so frequently -- from one side of the mouth, making the video promoting Special Olympics, and out of the other, cutting funding to these very programs).

Then I read the following article. I certainly could not express my own feelings any better:

wv: iraterra (irate era?)


omo said...

stacey -- i have wondered about Trig's size for a long time, ever since i went to the governor's picnic in Fairbanks that year. That was on Sunday, July 26th, 2008.

Sarah and Todd were just getting ready to leave and slowly walking towards the parking lot. I was quite close to them and watched them carefully for a good ten minutes, the crowd had thinned out and they seemed to be enjoying the calm after the barbecue.

Todd was carrying Trig. He had him in a 'football' hold, with Trig's head in the crook of his right elbow and his body along his forearm. Trig's feet did not extend past Todd's fingertips. He was, as always, fast asleep despite this being the third or fourth picnic in as many days and places. I wish I had gotten a picture, because I truly do not think the baby Todd was carrying that day was the same one presented at the RNC convention. Trig seemed to grow as fast in those four weeks as Sarah's tummy grew in the last four weeks of her 'pregnancy'.

By chance, I watched a Dateline show that fall (hardly ever watch tv) which was about VERY lifelike doll babies crafted by a woman in Florida. They showed some of her customers out on the street with their babies in strollers, etc., with passerby commenting on 'such a beautiful baby', etc. etc.
No one guessed that they were dolls. I am really wondering if they took a doll baby 'traveling' with them while the real baby was home with Bristol.
EVERY account of the baby being in public at that time stated that he was 'asleep'.

In fact, I got Sarah's book autographed by her that day as a present to my father, and the exact words I said to her, as Todd stood next to her holding Trig, were "your baby is beautiful". Because he was.
With the beauty of a very young infant. Not at all the baby seen one month later at the RNC.

Ivyfree said...

"Looking at those pix at mccainblogette...and many others of SP w/ Trig (see Palingates for an series of photos), I'm asking: why does she always have her harpy fingers in his face? Poking his cheeks or lips"

I noticed that in the video and pictures of her taking Trig into work 3 days after he was allegedly born. Todd was carrying him, and she poked at his face with her finger. I remember thinking how odd it was; I can see Daddy wanting to carry the baby, but when it was my husband and me, I would just take the baby back. I can't be the only one who remembers that yearning to hang onto the baby that's been inside me! I don't think I ever once poked a finger at one of my babies, although I will confess to nibbling on toesies with my lips and blowing into belly buttons!

Anonymous said...

As Audrey has so carefully detailed, there are so many inconsistencies and nonsensical elements to this pregnancy and birth when there shouldn't be - they announced her pregnancy and paraded her proudly pregnant body at the RNC, so why hide anything? Hmmm.

I just have to think that Bristol's dress choice and distorted stuffing were an amateur job - done by Bristol and/or Sarah for their own twisted reasons - otherwise someone is on the hook for the worst case of styling malpractice ever.

And it is bizarre that Bristol was made to look like that for that one appearance - and then never again. Reminds one of the uniqueness of the Gusty photos.

And it is so odd that after prominently parading her about at that RNC appearance we barely saw her again for the rest of the campaign although it does seem that she was traveling around with the Palins, not back home in Wasilla which would have made more sense for her own comfort and would have made more sense if she wanted to stay out of the spotlight. Makes one think that Bristol had to stay close to Trig as his primary caregiver, and Trig had to stay close to Sarah as her primary political prop, so . . .

And why all the mystery about when Tripp was born? I find it so out of character for Sarah not to have rushed out a photo of the happy Grandmother and baby. And as much as I would like the answer to be that Bristol wanted privacy, she soon gave that interview to Greta, appeared on the cover of People, and made her Candies' media tour.

My opinion is that Bristol did give birth to Tripp but later than was announced. But there are so many weird things surrounding this entire situation nothing would surprise me.

B said...

Doubting Thomas said, "And if anybody doesn't think Bristol pushing a twin stroller with two babies in it isn't f****** weird, then please explain it to me."

As far as we know, Bristol and her son TriPP live with the Palins, including TriG. Whatever family member takes one baby for a stroll will sometimes take the other baby for his stroll as well. Older siblings often are parental toward much younger siblings. Bristol could be walking TriG even if he were just her baby brother. TriG and TriPP won't be the first uncle/nephew raised somewhat like siblings.

back porch, I capitalize the G and PP to make sure I don't use the wrong name, not to mock the babies.

Amy1 said...

Lynn: I think this audio has the earliest published mention of the leaking fluid, at 4:00:

Reporter: So did your water break?

SP: Well! if you MUST know more of those type of details, . . .

Reporter: I only . . . your Dad said that, and I saw him say it, so that's why I asked . . . .

Obviously her father said it first, to a reporter, but I've never seen that moment published anywhere. Has anyone else?

deb said...

Hi! Me again- excellent sequel. I feel strongly that Bristole was breastfeading and pummping at the RNC. No one would not breastfeed a baby with the health issues of DC.

And I agree with jenie- the breast pads- at least used to be- ineffective- its been a few years since i was there- but just think: The NUMBER #1 thing that could NOT HAPPEN- NO MATTER WHAT- was LEAKING. They had to be very very sure. The towel they stuffed in the top section of that poor girls dress- was to ENSURE- NO LEAKING!!!!

(They are also stupid- all they had to do was give her a suit jacket)

One more thing while I am at it. Does ANYONE think a man's man like Levi- would lovingly kiss a infant that was not his. It also says a lot about him as a person- and his situation-his unconscious mind was railing against the FRAUD and abuse of bristol. That kiss was one of the sweetest things i've ever seen on film- and it was a one-finger message to SP.

CAC said...

I believe Bristol must have been pregnant when they made the announcement in Sept. As impetuous as Sarah Palin is, I cannot believe she would try to hide her faked pregnancy with another faked pregnancy under the circumstances. For one thing, she would have no idea how people, right and moderates, would react to her teenage daughter's pregnancy. She must have feared a political backlash the first time to go to the lengths she went to, and this time it was a question of public opinion across the country and the vice-presidency. Second, as much of a novice as she was to the national stage, she had to know that the scrutiny around Bristol's condition and her public exposure would be much greater and the risks of being discovered would be enormous and career-ending. IMO, she just got "lucky" with the second pregnancy as it provided a way to cover for a worse scandal. Bristol was probably only 3 to 4 months along (Trig having been born earlier than reported) and it was just a question of manipulating Tripp's due date.

pearlygirl said...

doubting thomas,
I have twins and belong to a twin club but you'd be surprized at how many parents of singletons have bought the used ones from us. Some just want the extra room but many have a friend/relative with a child who also needs a stroller. As unweildly as double strollers can be, it's a lot easier to have one person pushing two babies than have 2 separate strollers--even for two unrelated friends that do a lot of playdates/walks/coffee together

My compromise when travelling especailly in Europe has been single unbrella strollers with locks to connect them---easy to break apart and use when I have an extra person or it's a tight space but it's still much easier to use a double stroller whenever possible.

It's really not that out of place to use a double stroller especailly since Bristol still lives at home. It's really about convenience than parentage.

Jen said...

I still feel the need to clarify my take on the nursing theory. I believe Bristol could have been engorged OR not, but I believe that either way the padding WAS NOT just average padding. We all agree there was more padding than necessary. If the idea was to make her look more pregnant than she possibly was, I do not see why her breasts would be padded MORE than her stomach. Yes, breasts get big in pregnancy but if we were supposed to think her pregnancy was further along, I cannot grasp them not padding the stomach more than her breasts. I think the focus on her breasts was not to create an illusion but to disguise reality.

I think my comments on engorgement have been taken to the extreme as if I meant all we see is engorgement. Take away my comment about engorgment if it's a distraction, and I still lean toward her nursing and putting enough padding in to prevent ANY leakage which would have been THE ONLY sure fire evidence we could have had.


B said...

deb said,
"The towel they stuffed in the top section of that poor girls dress- was to ENSURE- NO LEAKING!!!!"

I disagree. If she needed a towel one night, she'd need one the next night as well. I see no evidence of a towel in the black dress she wore at the RNC.

I agree with Audrey that Bristol was not an engourged nursing mother at the RNC. I don't think she needed to wear a towel. (Although her mother made news for wearing a towel.) The bolster could be Bristol's own flesh pushed upward by a too small bra.

I am happy for Bristol that she is no longer a part of her mom's dog and pony show. She can be whatever weight she wants without worrying about Candies or the RNC.

vera city said...

Audrey, I think that you are right in identifying Sarah Palin outing Bristol's pregnancy at RNC as the cornerstone of this whole story. Sit back and think about this for a moment. That Sarah Palin's wild ride story doesn't stand up to scrutiny is a given, but is that what motivated this blog and kept it and us at this story? If Palin had discretely kept her mouth shut and the news of Bristol's pregnancy with Tripp had leaked out from other sources, I think that our response would be much different. Even though we - a high proportion of us being mothers - knew the story was false, we would have respected their privacy and thought it an old fashion, perhaps misdirected, but recognized practice of covering for an unwed daughter's pregnancy. A story of a mother and daughter in a bind that would evoke sympathy from most of the commentators of this blog.

What raised the red flags for me, and started me looking more seriously at Sarah Palin, was the callous act of outing Bristol's pregnancy at the RNC. A mother who would do that is not a mother who would cover her daughter's (or anyone's) pregnancy out of love and concern for her. It was the first publicized event regarding Sarah Palin, for those outside of Alaska, that had people respond in a visceral sense that something was seriously not right with McCain's new running mate.

People who study morality, as opposed to those who theorize about it, have uncovered that there is a universal sense of morality that people normally do not violate without feeling shame, guilt and remorse. Those feelings are called social emotions because they help people stay within the universal morality. Researchers have also determined that there is a group of people that do no not naturally follow this code and who do not suffer adverse feelings to self correct their behaviour. Ruthlessly throwing your minor daughter under the bus in order to 'progress' your ambitions is an example of this other behaviour. That group, as you have undoubtedly guessed, is heavily dominated by people who score high on the Psychopathy Checklist.

Audrey, that ache in your head comes from trying to fit Sarah's behaviour into an explanation that takes into account the universal sense of morality. Her behaviour makes makes complete sense when you compare it against checklist behaviour.

vera city said...

The shoddy treatment of Bristol continued.

So what else do we know about Sarah and her relationship with her children? We know from the pictures taken around the RNC that Bristol was acting as one of Trig's primary caregivers. From what we observed, it appeared that she was the primary caregiver. The bonding between the two was undeniable. What appeared to be Sarah's response to the photos? To banish Bristol from the campaign and have a seven year old child look after a special needs baby under difficult circumstances. Bristol only reappears, based on the available photos, from October 14 to her birthday on October 18 before she once again drops out of sight on the campaign trail. Does this make sense from a humane parenting point of view? Set aside the question of whether Bristol is Trig's birth mom. Trig's primary caregiver was taken away from him when he was being jostled across the country and displayed as a prop at loud rallies that ran late. Anyone who observed the campaign would see that Trig's 'mother', Sarah, did not have time to look after his needs. No wonder it appears as if they drugged him into a stupor during those two months, he would be having separation anxiety from being taken from Bristol. If Bristol was with the campaign, but kept in hiding from the photographers -including Megan McCain - and all public events, we once again have to ask why and what purpose did it serve.

Bristol's banishment from the entire immediate family came directly after Sarah announced that they would stand behind Bristol as a family. What was Bristol doing during this period - well, just like the Willow and Piper, she wasn't going to school . So why banish her? If she was going to become a mother for the first time, the experience of looking after Trig would be a good one for her to have. Although, from what I can gather about Sarah's reluctance to have people outside of the family look after her children, Bristol would have already clocked a substantial amount of time bringing up Piper while mommy was busy being mayor. (She was almost eleven when Piper was born - four years older than when Sarah deemed Piper old enough to look after Trig. ) Sarah obviously felt that Bristol was an experienced caregiver of children when she offered Bristol's baby-sitting services to Tina Fey on Bristol's eighteenth birthday.

Banishment, by the way, seems to be a technique that Sarah uses quite frequently on her children once they become problematic to her. Track was banished to the lower 48 for a school year where, according to Sarah, she never visited him even though she gets on planes at the drop of a hat or the leaking of amniotic fluid. After that he was enlisted and banished to Iraq - thus turning a child who was a liability for Sarah's 'progressing' to an exploitable asset whether he is dead or alive. (As distastefully as it is to contemplate, the death or disablement of Track would be political gold for Sarah.) Bristol was carted off away from her family for part of her missing period in 2007/08. (As an aside, Todd appears to spend most of his time away from the family either up North for his two jobs or training for his snow machine races. It appears with the new revelations that he was also just a prop to be brought out on public appearances.)

It all doesn't make sense: within a week we saw the sudden surfacing of the Gutsy photo; the announcement of Bristol's pregnancy with the exaggerated stuffing of her dress; and Bristol's disappearance once the pictures of her bonding with Trig were published. It only falls together as a desperate response to squishing the rumours that Sarah did not give birth to Trig - wouldn't showing a birth certificate have been easier?

Amy1 said...

wayofpeace re your President Obama quote: "dishonest"! YES! dishonest is what we have been saying here all along. Shouting it! Repeating it. Looking at it from every angle.

Our dear SP has been dishonest from the moment we first clapped eyes on her. No surprise that she would be dishonest on a critical national issue.

Anonymous said...

So many of you have articulated what I believe far better than I can myself.

The idea that SPalin operates outside the bounds of normal social and moral codes is exactly what confounds me.

I remember when OJ bludgeoned his wife and her lover, when he led the police chase. I had such a hard time juggling that behavior with the man who had made me laugh in the movies and the man who, on the football field, had made my racist father cheer.

How could he be all those things?

How can she? Thank you, VeraCity for providing some understanding.

So, really, given what SP did once (faking a pregnancy in front of the world), who can imagine what she might do as a followup? Fake baby? Baby doll as TriG? Borrowed baby? Adopt 2nd baby? Sacrifice Bristol at the RNC? Why not? OJ murdered two people. He got off. The second crime may have been pathetic, but it brought justice.

And if anyone of you are offended that I might compare SP to OJ, at least OJ didn't mess with public policy.

mel said...

I keep trying to picture BP's RNC dress without the stuffing. I don't care if it's got spandex in it or not, it seems like that bodice has so much excess material that it would hang and droop way down with only a pair of breasts behind it, engorged or not. Was it initially pleated? Draped? What kind of crazy ass dress is that anyway? Was she just trying to deal with the oversized bodice?

Vera city, your thoughts make ringing sense of the bizarre.

Ivyfree said...

"No one would not breastfeed a baby with the health issues of DC."

Oh, I disagree. While it might get me banned from a blog by a lactation consultant, I found breastfeeding extremely unpleasant and only did the minimum- a few weeks. No way would I have struggled with pumping and bottling. That's why they invented Enfamil. But I wouldn't have had a DS baby, if I'd known in advance.

Ivyfree said...

"To me the biggest proof that something is wrong is that there is no independent proof that Tripp was ever born, much less when."

Right. We're all familiar with what happens when somebody well-known lands in a hospital. There's a press conference with a hospital administrator and a spokesperson for the celebrity. In this case, it could have been extremely brief. "Bristol Palin was hospitalized last night and this morning at X o'clock, after an uncomplicated labor, gave birth to a boy. Mother and son are doing fine. No questions will be taken, as she has asked that her privacy be respected. We have a handout with a picture of them, and that is the only picture that will be released at this time. Thank you for being here today."

This could have been followed by a statement from the Governor: "You've all seen a picture of my new grandson, and we're all thrilled that he and Bristol are doing well. I'm not going to asnwer questions about them, because Bristol has asked that her privacy be respected. I'll just say that every new baby brings joy. Next question, please?"

When has Sarah ever been discreet, though, let alone appropriate? So why keep quiet at the one time when a discreet acknowledgment would have been beneficial for her?

Morgan said...


Would the person who commented about Gusty please email me privately at

Moderator Palin Deception

B said...

"[S]he gets on planes at the drop of a hat or the leaking of amniotic fluid."

Good one, vera city.

Dee said...

Jeanie said: "The main word I disagree with here is 'effective'. I am very NOT well-endowed and when I was nursing, I used these pads with very little effect. If I started leaking;"

That was my experience too. I went from a non-pregnant 34-A to a nursing 36-B and those little shields only worked if I had my baby handy and could immediately grab her and start nursing when I felt my milk let-down. If my baby wasn't handy or I was not in place where I could nurse, embaressment would rapidly ensue if I did not head straight for the bathroom.

I recall the first time I went to the mall without my baby. I heard another baby cry, my milk let down and I raced to the bathroom where I hung out in a stall waiting for the leaking to slow down to a point where some pads in my bra could handle it. If I had been in Bristol's situation, I would have wanted to be wearing rubber padding over my boobs. That said, if that was padding to absorb leaking milk, it was way too much. But she or her handlers might have wanted to error on the side of caution, because if she had leaked milk on National TV, Palin's political career would have ended that night.

Joe Christmas said...

doubting thomas,
I saw the double stroller pic back on July 5th, I think it was in the NYT. You are spot on, I totally agree with your comments. But I thought it just more circumstantial evidence. Of course, it is a mountain of circumstance. This website is the repository of reasonable questioning and observation. I suppose it just reflects the sinkhole of lies these phonies have dug.

wayofpeace said...

AMY1, that's a great new page.

as i always say (and MORGAN in her home page, too) SIMPLICITY always yields the most effective and compelling means of communication.

Joe Christmas said...

vera city,
good to see you are back and hopping. With your thoughtful, in-depth comments about Spalin's mental health disorder, I am reminded that I think it may be her ultimate undoing.
I don't know if you ever answered my ?'s back in July. Briefly,
1. Folie a deux?
2. Hyperreligiosity?
3. Lack of humor?
4. What do you think of CBJ?


Steve said...

I don't know if anyone else posted this, but here's a link to a picture of the Wasilla hillbillies at the July 4, 2009 parade in Juneau. Two kids - looks like Trigg on the right.

Doubting Thomas said...

Palingates did a nice blog on SP and her body language while holding Trig, and comparing it to how other people hold Trig. in the process she did a great side by side photo comparison of all the "Different" Trigs. Most look alike, but there a couple of Trigs in there that do not look like the other....
or if you prefer

midnightcajun said...

Very interesting, Audrey. Bristol's expanding and contracting belly are just one more crazy part of the Palin Charade. None of it makes sense.

When I first saw Bristol and her bolster, I thought it was engorged breasts + padding. But I find it hard to believe she'd go through all that trouble to breastfeed Trig in secret, then only breastfeed Tripp for a month (as she has publicly said).

Someone mentioned the odd excess material that dress must have had in the bodice to accommodate her bolster, which is true. I don't think that's a maternity dress; I think it's a bigger size normal dress. Maybe that was the problem--to get the dress big enough to fit Bristol's stomach, it had a much larger bustline that she couldn't fill, so they gave her a big bra and stuffed it. Seeing her in the photos, they realized their mistake and got her a maternity dress, the black one she's wearing in the next photo set.

I do believe Bristol was pregnant in the fall--simply not as far along as the Republicans proclaimed. I think the October 14 Walmart video is very telling. In it, Bristol has a pregnant woman's stance and is also somewhat humorously concerned and annoyed that her mom has taken Trig for the cameras. My suspicion is that she either had Tripp later than 12/27, or he was very premature, hence the need to avoid having him photographed.

I'm also in the camp that believes Trig was born much earlier than April, perhaps as early as January. It is highly possible that the bonding that occurred between Bristol and her newborn in the NICU is was precipitated her insistence that the baby not be given away, hence provoking Sarah into her charade.

As others have pointed out, the Wild Ride could have been provoked by the unexpected 3-days notice that the Anchorage hospital was about to discharge him.

I keep thinking about something that Gryphen of IM said, that the truth when it came out would be incredible, blow people's minds. Since we've imagined almost everything, I keep trying to figure out, What haven't we guessed?

Joe Christmas said...

amy1, I love your site as it links the witch exocism video upfront and prominent-like.
As I said 9 months ago -- who believes in witches? Can they be Republicans? Do they still fly with brooms, stopping abortions? If they do fly, can they get sucked into a turbo jet on Dick Armey's plane. Is "death panel" end-of -life counseling available to the undead? Let's ask Spalin or Dudes buddies who helped him build the house.
Joe Xmas

deb said...

Amy1- good catch! that tape- of Sarah's father announcing the breaking of the water. I missed that...this is such a multi-facited and tedious scenerio. I am facinated by the differnt experiences and opinions.

For instance- I am sure and have no doubt (in my own mind) about the padding of bristals top section at the RNC to prevent leaking. I thought it at the time and it is still my opinion- based on my and other peoples experience-(one sees and comes to know a lot in 30-years of adult observation}. I was a hospital administrator when my last child was born. I had two- and three hour meetings- where I needed to be able to be present & focused. I literally used handtowels to keep from becomming noticably drinched. Now, if I had wanted to- or could have left- I wouldn't have done so...but in my situation- as perhaps in Bristols-if you didn't want to have to worry/get up and leave- then you better pad well.

My guess is that "they" thought Bristal would have been "suspect" if she had left the stage...and would have blown the entire fraud if she had leaked.

The small bra explaination just doesn't cut it for me- again,not based on conjecture, but experience. My daughter has been there done that several times- she's a 34DD- never looked ANYTHING like that mess.

I'm open minded...i will be willing to consiter any experiencially-based "theory". But we need to remain as scientific as possible. the more ppl give empirical evidence when they present theories- the better.

wayofpeace said...

here's a BLOGGER who crashed the MSM glass ceiling:

wayofpeace said...

GAWKER re the insanity at the PEE-ZZO. please do not watch the video if you have a weak stomach. i could only tolerate the first 30 seconds when i felt nauseous, LITERALLY!

Sarah Palin, 'The World's Greatest'
By The Cajun Boy

Since most Sarah Palin fetishists think she's Christ reincarnated with a folksy twang and fertile vagina, it stands to reason that someone would eventually make a Palin video tribute set to the music of R. Kelly. That time is now.

At first glance you'd think that this utterly hilarious compilation, featuring the music of a black man renowned for on-camera golden showers and statutory rape, was a parody made by Keith Olbermann or Bill Maher's staffs, but it was actually put together and posted to the web this morning by the delusional wingnuts who run the Conservatives4Palin website. Prepare to be mesmerized.

Elizabeth said...

The black dress with the white insert seemed to need no padding. I think the gray dress was a blouson-style top, and I don't think that would need to be padded out. The sleeves are very tight on her upper arms. I would imagine that the handlers bought several outfits for each person to try. And they chose this one? It's just the wrong size, so what was the point?

vera city said...


I am glad to find that you like a woman with a sense of humour. I wonder, however, at the other women you hang out with. I think it is fairly important to establish that the bolster chest has been deliberately padded out of proportion. I thought about your belief that Bristol was in a too small bra that cause the fullness in her upper chest. By the way, that fullness is called 'pillowing' by those in the trade. It is impossible that Bristol could fill that dress with only her own breasts no matter how she was strapped in to it. So I went for a stroll through the internet to find similar bolster chests for comparison. Most of the sites where I felt I could find them are not suitable for this forum, so instead I looked at pictures of Dolly Parton. Here is a picture that is similar to what Bristol was padded to at the RNC:

(I would give you other ones but the addresses are too long.) Now Dolly is going to look proportionally bigger than Bristol because they were trying to emphase that Bristol's belly had a baby in it and Dolly's looks like she has the ribcage of a squirrel. But the shape and size of the chest is the same. So if that is the breast size that it takes to get the bolster look unpadded (and I discovered that Dolly is most definitely assisted from the inside) then Bristol was padded.

For those of you who think it was done to hide any possibility of potential breast milk leakage, can you tell me why they put Bristol in a grey dress: the colour and fabric that is guaranteed to turn black if such an event were to occur. Whoever dressed Bristol was either worried about leakage or they were not and, if they were worried, that fear dissipated the next day as well as not being there ten days before. The grey dress was not put on Bristol because it was the only option available. Except for Bristol, the Palin clan was dressed by a professional with a good eye for making people attractive, who was responsible for wardrobe. The black dress that Bristol wore to the photo shot was picked by a professional and it would have been available, along with other flattering options, for the RNC. The grey dress was the anomaly. And, by the way, the dress was altered. No dress bought off the rack will fit a rack like that - there are just not enough Dolly Partons walking around to make it economically viable to sell to that market. Without the chest to fill it, the dress and fabric would hang horribly on anyone else.

Why is this important? It shows us that Sarah Palin felt a desperate need to deceive people to get the story she wanted across. I have been thinking about who she was really trying to deceive at that particular moment. More in a bit.


p.s. Joe I haven't forgotten you. Those are nuanced questions to answer.

Yellowgirl said...

Great comments everyone, and great post Audrey! Here are a few of my thoughts:

1. I found it interesting that of all the bottles in the pics with Trig, they all appear to be small Medela bottles. I recognize them b/c I did a lot of pumping myself, and those bottles can be directly attached to the Medela pump horns. (To see a pic of what Medela bottles look like, go here: ).

2. The Medela bottles are somewhat expensive and small, and not something I would expect to see being used if no one was pumping. I doubt that Sarah, who couldn't be bothered to buy a proper fake belly, would think to buy these bottles as a ruse. Therefore, I think *someone* was at least pumping some of the time.

3. I think it is possible that Bristol was pumping breast milk b/c of Trig's DS, but maybe only a few times a day. I know I only pumped 2 x a day for a long time, and supplemented with formula. But the "breast is best" and "every little bit helps" mantra is pretty strong, and probably Bristol was encouraged strongly to pump for Trig since he was a NICU baby. I have a very young cousin who was adamant she was grossed out by breastfeeding and would NOT breastfeed-- when her son was in the NICU, they convinced her to at least pump for him for about a month. Since Trig has DS, Bristol may have decided to do that for him longer than she would have felt necessary for a healthy baby Tripp.

4. However, that gray dress is NOT amenable to pumping/breastfeeding. The black one is loose and could be pulled up or down more readily, but that gray one would be impossible. You'd have to completely undress. Not sure if that is relevant to the breastfeeding/pumping analysis, as for a one time event maybe nobody cared, but maybe it is.

5. IIRC, the other Morgan that had the photo site, hypothesized that Bristol had a fake belly strapped over her pg body, and the combo of her own pg breasts and the fake breasts caused the weird look.

6. The gray dress look was the first and longest (?) look at Bristol on national TV. It was also just after the pg announcement. They HAD to have her look noticeably pg. Later, it wasn't such a big deal. Sorta like how Sarah had to have one pg pic of her own pg, but otherwise just used scarves.

7. When, oh when, will the MSM take notice???????

Original Lee said...

I think that the gray dress was over-padded for 2 reasons: 1) to make absolutely certain there were no leaks; and 2) to ensure that Bristol looked pregnant. I believe that when they padded Bristol initially, she didn't look pregnant enough *from the front*, so they kept adding until it looked right from that angle and didn't realize how bizarre it looked from the side. As for the color, I seem to remember that Sarah was wearing black that day, so Bristol couldn't wear black, too. Also, I don't think Bristol would have been very engorged, depending on what her nursing/pumping schedule was, especially if Trigg had been about 6 months old at that point. When I went back to work after having my kids, the first 6 weeks were not much fun because I had to time my pumping around meetings, but after that point, I really had to go a very long time without either pumping or nursing - my body had adjusted to the new schedule. Just my 2 cents.

vera city said...

I noticed that a number of people have mentioned feeling physically uneasy when thinking or reading about Sarah Palin. I thought this passage from "Snakes In Suits - When Psychopaths Go to Work" by Paul Babiak and Robert Hare would shed a bit of light:

"In Without Conscience, Hare noted that many people feel uncomfortable in the presence of a psychopath, whom he described as a social predator. Although most people can't put their finger on what bothers them, many comment that they were bothered by a 'predatory stare and empty eyes.'

"In a recent study, researchers J. Reid Meloy and M.J. Meloy studied the reactions of mental health and criminal justice professionals concerning their 'physical reactions' while interviewing psychopathic offenders or patients. The reactions were varied and included sensations and feelings that were gastrointestinal (queasy stomach, feeling of illness), muscular (shaky feeling, weakness), cardiovascular (pounding heart), pulmonary (shortness of breath), perceptual (watchful, couldn't look into the eyes), and dermatological (skin crawled, goosebumps). Many reported feelings of general anxiety, being ill at ease, repulsion, fascination, and stimulation. Some reported that they wished to flee the scene or that they felt as if they were about to become lunch.

"The authors suggested that their findings could be interpreted as suggestive evidence of a primitive, autonomic, and fearful response to a predator. They described the psychopath as an interspecies predator."

Puts a whole different spin on Sarah Palin's statement "We eat, therefore we hunt."

What the study is describing is partly because people intuitively know that something is wrong when they meet someone who doesn't abide by universal morality. We want that morality to be in place and will try to make the psychopaths behaviour fit into that code. Watch Keith Olberman interviewing Shannyn Moore about Sarah Palin's comments on death panels. He asks Shannyn if Palin is registering guilt about how many seniors died in Alaska because Palin refused additional funding to the program looking after their needs. Shannyn's response: "I don't think that Sarah Palin registers guilt." She should know, she has been watching Palin up close for quite awhile now.

And, by the way, this isn't just the feelings of those people who don't like Palin. The general anxiety, being ill at ease, repulsion, fascination, and stimulation is also happening to the followers of Palin. That is why they feel 'starbursts' when she speaks and become devoted to her. It is also why it is so easy for Palin to work the crowds into a frenzy and redirect their anxiety elsewhere. Have you noticed how many of the statements she makes about others are really just describing her own behaviour or actions?

I am curious - have more of you had a physical reaction to Palin?

omo said...

vera city -- my mother watched the resignation speech and was really repulsed by the bony, pointing fingers (I was in the crowd but too far back to see clearly). Sarah also did this last fall, pointing at specific people as she deplaned, worked a crowd, etc.

It's almost a star wars type of thing, where you expect plasma energy to 'fly from her fingertips' (sort of like the missing 'less politically correct twitters'). And she points at Trig like that too. Also.

My personal feeling is that psychopathy is a frequency which some people channel and some people resonate to. For those sorts, it is 'normal',
in fact inescapable. Just like a very strong radio broadcast will override other, weaker signals. But most of us do not have 'receptors' for that frequency and are freaked out by those who do.
It is part of the psychpath's game to negate the physical signals our bodies generate in response to their presence. Most of this happens on a level which, in general, we are not consciously aware of.

Good catch on the 'we eat, therefore we hunt'
quote ! That is the essence of the psychopathic realm. They are definitely predators. Miss Sarah was totally telling us that with TurkeyGate. I could just see her, dressed in something appropriately
Empress-y, pardoning one of her human subjects at random while the rest were guillotined behind her . . .

Laura said...

I recall something very clearly. It was at the beginning of the campaign, the Wasillabillies were just off the bus, literally, beginning to campaign in public, right after the introduction in Minneapolis. I recall SP introducing the family members on stage and saying that Bristol was back in the bus with her baby brother. And of course I thought what I thought when I saw them on stage, that she was nursing her own baby, the same baby she held while her mother shrieked about glass ceilings and non-bridges. It stays with me how curious it was that Bristol was in the bus with "her baby brother," not a nanny, not the dad, but Bristol. Coincidence? I think not. And FWIW, those were nursing boobs padded for leakage. That was not a push-up bra, that was padding. Massive, unnatural padding. That was panic just before she walks on stage, padding.

Anonymous said...


I just thought of the following.

Stuffing the gray dress was crude because it was last minute. Sarah grabbed the only thing to hand when she realized at the last minute that Bristol would be onstage and that they couldn't take the risk of leakage. (which would blow the whole charade of Trig's birth) In all the hubbub no one had planned for that-- particularly because no one knew, except Sarah, Bristol, and Todd.

(Imagine the stylist who later saw her carefully selected dress for Bristol stuffed grotesquely!)

By the next night, someone trusted had gotten the right nursing shields. Or made sure B. pumped dry before her appearance.

Not much but it explains the padding.

cadie said...

Vera City,
Excellent comment! Yes, I do have a physical reaction as well as a mental/emotional reaction to the sociopath/psychopath Palin. If you have people like her in your family, you WILL be drawn to them or viscerally repulsed by them.

I have no doubt, whatsoever, that she is a predator and the only thing that will stop her is SHE herself.

I agree with omo, too. There are those with receptors built in that respond positively to psychopaths like Palin and those who do not.

However, everyone senses something about her, even if they don't know how to interpret it accurately.

I was stalked by a women sociopath for eight years. She gave the appearance of normal to others, but to her targets, she was erratic, illogical, impulsive, self-absorbed, sneaky--a constant/compulsive liar who fooled some of the people all of the time. Others would be frozen with befuddlement, wondering, "Who would do such a thing?"

This is the profile of Palin and, I'm pretty sure the pathology of all sociopaths/psychopaths.

What comforts me as I watch this drama play out, is that these creatures have failed lives. They do NOT have the ability to learn from their mistakes, but those who interact with them DO.

While I believe that the msm may never care about Palin's faked pregnancy, it is important to continue exposing the lie. It is part of the documentation that someday will add up to enough evidence for others to reject her predator's seductive energy.

The main goal, the urgency we all feel, is for all of us to seek how to minimize the effect of such psychopathy on our society while we wait for the eventual self-destruction. This was the challenge we all faced during the Bush years--how to minimize the dismantling of our personal rights, the under-cutting of our economy and the lies that cost lives.

We must never give up exposing this liar (Palin) in any legal and rational way possible.

Thank you for continuing the good fight!

Daisydem said...

I think I just left my comment on the wrong blog .. I do want others to read what I have to say and see if they concur: I am starting to think that Bristol Palin was NOT pregnant with Tripp (at least not as far along as we were led to believe) and maybe not at all. I point to the fact that she is wearing jeans (what appear to be traditional levis) in a couple of pictures where if she is 5-7 months pregnant, I don't think she could fasten them and they would be uncomfortable to wear. I see the "tummy" coming down the steps of the plane as being soft, squishy even. I think the sweatshirt (OSU) she wears coming down off the bus has a pouch in front, and the pouch has been stuffed to protrude. Overall, as Audrey points out, her tummy size seems to not be consistent with the "progression" of a pregnancy. The size varies unbelievably in various pictures. Check the picture of Bristol meeting McCain at the airport the day of the RNC evening when her mother would speak - she is padded there too, I think. The blouse is a navy silky blouse and her bosom looks huge.

anne s said...

re: WayofPeace Pee-land tribute video

I posted on another blog, you may of seen :)
I LOVE Obama .. adore the man.. find him actually pretty darn hot!

But as much passion I have for the guy.. I would almost feel disrespectful to him if I sat around for hours with photos of him putting a collage together for a video set to music that makes me feel warm and tingly

It is just creepy

that's stuff 6th graders do with their favorite pop icon

You got OLD people doing this.. to Palin's mug
No wonder nothing phases them about her.. she could lob off someone's head with a kitchen knife and her followers would find some way of twisting it to make her victim the enemy.. she had to do it for the Troops!

these video "tributes" ..gag me.. just show their warped minds..
Sad really.. most act like Christians and she tries to be Mother of all Christians.. yet the are treating her like an "idol" ..
Glad I am not the only one that sees through this stuff.. forever I thought I was crazy and just not hip enough when she came prancing on stage back in Aug '08.. I was like there is something very wrong here.. enough google clicks and wa-lah! These blogs.. my sanity.. god bless you folk!

mel said...

**I am curious - have more of you had a physical reaction to Palin?**

Most of the SP-focused bloggers, including Audrey, report headaches, as in "this is all making my head hurt."

Me: nausea (ad nauseum), racing heart and pulse (over the "death panels" message), flushed face (when she refers to Trig as her child). Definitely general anxiety and repulsion. And a whole lot of anger.

Punkinbugg said...

How compelling your posts are, "Omo"!

Talk about "Up Close & Personal"!!


Oh by the way!

Do you have any friends who owned & operated a digital camera at Dear Old Wasilla High School or -- better yet -- The Fairbanks chapter of the American Heart Association's Go Red for Women Luncheon in Feb. 2008!?


wayofpeace said...

just finished reading a very troubling book by CHRIS HEDGES titled: EMPIRE OF ILLUSION. here's a quote, which validates our deep dislike of SARAH and her PALINISTAS, and everything she / they represent:

[if/when the economy hits the skids,]we will become WEIMAR GERMANY. A furious and sustained backlash by a betrayed and angry populace, one unprepared intellectually and psychologically for collapse, will sweep aside the Democrats and most of the Republicans. A cabal of protofascist misfits, from Christian demagogues to simpletons like Sarah Palin to loudmouth talk-show hosts, whom we naively dismiss as buffons, will find a following with promises of revenge and moral renewal."

kari said...

**I am curious - have more of you had a physical reaction to Palin?**

I had a strong reaction to Palin the moment she stepped on stage and started speaking. The way she wrinkled her nose and tightened her lips immediately reminded me of my mother. My mother is bipolar and has a narcissistic personality disorder.

Allison said...

OMG, I have felt all of this from the first time I saw/heard her. Actually it's good to know that I was not weird or just unkind for being creeped out by her.

MY reactions were varied and included sensations and feelings that were gastrointestinal (queasy stomach, feeling of illness), , perceptual (watchful, couldn't look into the eyes), and dermatological (skin crawled, goosebumps). I reported feelings of general anxiety, being ill at ease, repulsion,

Jen said...

Laura -- I forgot about SP's comment that Bristol was with her baby brother on the bus. But as soon as I read your comment I immediately recalled how odd I thought that was. I can't remember if we knew she was pregnant at that time or not. The Daily Kos had probably already posted about Babygate, though...


Molly said...

Vera city--

Oh yes. I made a point to watch her very first speech at the RNC and I was fairly spitting at the TV in a matter of seconds at the lies spewing forth from her smarmy made-up mouth. It was definitely anger on my part that someone touted as a "breath of fresh air" could speak with such contempt and such blatant lies while pretending to be so charming.

I've noted this before, and it jibes with the general issue you raise--she is a Person of the Lie.
M. Scott Peck (flawed man that it turned out he has been) wrote a marvelous book called "People of the Lie". He presents case histories of people just like Sarah--and the saddest cases involved parents who harmed their children's pyches.

Ex. Older son commits suicide with a shotgun which was given to him by parents for hunting. Next birthday (or Christmas, maybe) parents give that same shotgun...the one used in the younger son....and when confronted by Peck, claim that younger son should be happy to obtain such a fine gun. They claim they do not understand how their younger son could possibly think that in giving him the gun, they are, to him, asking him to also commit suicide. Pure evil. We can't call it cluelessness; it is pure evil--absolute self-centeredness, and an inability to put oneself in another's shoes.

And yeah, that is nauseating.

Joe Christmas said...

take your time on the nuance, as there is no shortage of it here!
I must admit, though, I am looking forward to your insightful thoughts.
You have changed the whole discourse regarding spalin's pathopsychology in the last month or so. I thought we had a small victory when Vanity Fair and Maureen Dowd put her NPD into print, but your analysis is much more accurate and elucidating.
And I get the feeling there is much more to come.
For the record, my visceral response to her is not hatred. I would say I always felt queasy, labeled her as a phony from the get-go (or as Audrey says, her BS meter went redline). But I remain fascinated only because she is a reflection of the flawed political process and the hypocrisy of the right-wing and the MSM. Further, I want to see how this plays out as I think it will be American History.

So keep it comin'

kari said...

It would be interesting to know some day if Sarah Palin does have NPD. If so, many of these parents harm their children in all kinds of ways. They can be manipulative, mean spirited, and filled with such anger they become violent with the child, sometimes choosing one child over another to constantly punish and they totally lack empathy.

They can be very good actors and sometimes only those in the immediate family or others who have been hurt by them can see the way they truly are.

Besides being bipolar with NPD, my mother has always had a steady supply of prescription and over the counter drugs that she mixes. During the past few decades she has had numerous breakdowns where she has had to be hospitalized. Even though she has received counseling, she has never taken responsibility for her actions that have caused harm to others, especially to her own family, she always blames someone else.

wayofpeace said...

WOW, here's a summary of of a WAPO op-ed: McCarthyism? Try 'Palinism'

(Newser Summary) – If Sarah Palin echoes a figure in American politics, it's Joseph McCarthy—so "try this on for size: Palinism," writes Richard Cohen in the Washington Post. Like McCarthy, she has a lefty "menace" to invent facts about, and she's succeeding in wounding health reform with a "loopy" remark about "death panels" that "has to rank with McCarthy's announcement that 'I have here in my hand a list of 205' (or 57 or 72 or whatever) names of communists in the State Department."

Like McCarthy, Palin has her victims: "The poor, the uninformed and the ideologically blind who will find themselves unable to make a graceful exit." Most frighteningly—as with McCarthy—conservatives would rather stand back and let her fan the political flames than publicly disagree. McCarthy fell from grace, and Palin's numbers are already sinking. But first she will "expose the appalling opportunism of the Republican leaders. I have in my hand a list of their names."
—Neal Colgrass

wayofpeace said...

from COHEN's OP-ED:

McCarthy's career was mercifully short. He made his famous speech in 1950 and was censured by the Senate four years later. By 1957, he was dead. His rise was a product of a now-antiquated newspaper culture, but his fall was abetted by the advent of TV. Americans looked and were appalled. He was finished.

Palin, as wholesome as McCarthy was not, is ready-made for television. Still, she has gone from a 57 percent favorable rating soon after McCain picked her as his running mate to a current 39 percent -- a negative landslide of justifiable proportions. Before she fades into fringedom, she will do one bad and one good thing -- hurt the very people she supposedly champions and expose the appalling opportunism of the Republican leaders.

Lily B, said...

Hi Audrey and all-
I have followed your blog for months, and this is my first comment. I want to say that I am a conservative but NOT a Palin supporter.

It annoys me more than words can say that conservative politicians (and voters) have seriously supported Palin as a candidate. We do not need ill-informed, under-educated people leading the country. Though there might be certain issues on which I agree with Palin, how can I support her if she appears insane?

For you other conservatives out there, you need to understand it is very important that we have intelligent, thoughtful, educated representatives, not just someone who "says the right things" about his or her own belief system.

Now that I have that out of the way, I can comment on the Bristol photos, etc.

Wow, I remember seeing the larger-than-life bosom picture, and my response was, "WHAT in the world happened with her?? Why does she have a pillow under her dress? Is she wearing the fake belly Sarah had, but got it upside down??"

I agree with Audrey that something is not right, but what exactly that something is, is unclear.

I initially found this Blog because I just could not understand why the Wild Ride story was believed by anyone. Similar to Sarah's story about her pregnancy with Trig, I was a high risk pregnant mother due to maternal age and (it was suspected) a DS baby. I also, even though there was suspected DS, would not terminate. I also had had preterm labor with an earlier pregnancy. Towards the end of the pregnancy I barely even wanted to go to the grocery store, let alone go on an AIRPLANE with so many risk factors.

ABSOLUTELY CRAZY is what I thought about the wild ride.

As it turned out, my baby did not have DS, but as we much later found out, did have a very severe heart defect. Thus another similarity - through Trig does not have the severity of defect my child had. Still, if I had known about the heart defect before birth, that would have multiplied my caution tenfold.

Anyone who would be so crazy as to go on the wild ride with those risk factors is insane. If we allow that she is not insane, then we must conclude that she is very careless and thoughtless at best. Not exactly VP candidate material. I believe her subsequent national interviews have shown that the wild ride was not some sort of lapse in judgment by an otherwise level-headed individual.

I know you have been all through this, but being new to the discussion and also a conservative, I wanted to make my thoughts known.

Thank you.

jeanette said...

I think what we have with Bristol’s presentation in the gray dress at the convention is most likely political pettiness in a situation where “mamma bear” was once again not willing to stand up for her child. I think that Sarah had not disclosed to the campaign ahead of time the issue of “the pregnancy” and that McCain and his staff found out at the convention too late to dump Sarah. It would have made McCain look pretty bad to have flubbed that decision.

So when Bristol was thrown under the bus without any objections from Sarah, some unhappy campaign operatives said, if we have to squash this rumor lets do it good and make sure Bristol looks really pregnant. We can’t make the tummy look much larger because of prior pictures but we can make the bustline look larger. Also tummy pictures won’t show when she is sitting. So the stuffing of the bustline.

There is no way that stuffing was to stop leaking, That stuffing was above the normal breast line, practically up to her neck As far as I am concerned, it was malicious on the part of whomever dressed her. It seems to me that Bristol likely did not understand what was going on and how it would look and neither Sarah nor Todd protected their child. So what else is new?

The issue of how Bristol looked was also an issue that the McCain campaign staff knew that the MSM would not touch. So they got their visual image of a “very” pregnant Bristol across. And they did succeed didn’t they?

Rationalist said...

Re: physical reactions to Palin

I know the topic is the physical response people have to a psychopath, and the reaction to seeing a person on TV is not the same, but I'm still compelled to write.

My reaction to Palin's VP acceptance speech was pretty visceral, especially the way she cited Hillary Clinton's "millions of cracks in the glass ceiling." Clinton kicked and clawed and worked her ass off on her way to just-missing the nomination, ultimately giving an incredibly gracious speech at the DNC that threw her support behind Obama. To then watch Palin, THE DAY AFTER OBAMA'S DNC SPEECH, step neatly into the void left by Hillary in her red stilettos, as if she had earned it, like a pageant crown made available because of a scandal, was gross.

But it was the RNC speech that made me feel, quite literally, like throwing up. The enthusiastic ignorance, the cattiness, the seething venom made me sign up that night to volunteer for the Obama campaign.

But here's what really surprised me. I have a relative who is passionately apolitical. You cannot talk about politics in front of her. She hates campaign commercials, she hates the conflict, she thinks they're all a bunch of con-men. We just avoid any talk of politics.

She was at my house during the election, and Palin came up in the conversation. She cornered me for almost an HOUR in the kitchen telling me how awful she thought Palin was, that she was a psychopath, that the way she uses her kids is disgusting. It truly surprised me. And then, of course, I said "you know, there's evidence she didn't even give birth to her last kid," and showed her this site. She's completely convinced.

And that to this gushing new C4P video that came out yesterday. I swear to god, the people who love Palin and the people who loath her are living in two entirely different realities. She is the most polarizing figure I've ever seen.

Ivyfree said...

Veering into the realm of pure unsubstantiated speculation, it's possible that the stylist bought the dress in the wrong size because that's what s/he was told. "Get a size 16- Bristol's really put on weight lately, you wouldn't believe her pot belly! We've really be on her case to exercise more!" and then OMG Bristol's leaking and she has to start padding before she appears in public!

As I said, pure speculation. But stylists do, I understand, shop for the client for an event- it's possible Bristol never saw that dress before the day of the RNC.

Dangerous said...

I hope everyone read Lily B's comments closely because it will help those of you concerned about SP's future influence on America, and Mr. Hedges' and others overheated rhetoric about the it.

We are not heading toward a fascist take-over, with the crowds blindfully following cheerleader Sarah Palin. Things have been much worse in this country and clear heads always prevail.

To the extent SP has any influence at all in the Republican party, it hurts them more than it helps. She can garner her 24% and that -- plus her looks -- are enough to keep her in the news. But that's all. Occasionally, she'll stumble on a point she can amplify -- like the 'death panels' nonsense -- but only if the crowd is already cheering. She's no leader.

It's a good thing for progessives that McCain rushed her to the national stage. If she had gotten her act together and gained a little real experience, she might have been formidable. But now she never will, as her early resignation made clear. She's more interested in the attention than real power.

Proving she faked her pregnancy would finish her for good; there's little doubt about that. Attention on her wild ride -- if shown to be true -- would also finish her for anyone who considers the level of recklessness involved. If she runs for anything again, it will come up.


back porch said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Elizabeth said...

Re: Visceral reactions

When Sarah’s nomination was first announced, my husband was out of town with no access to TV. He asked me what kind of person Sarah was.

I gave him my first impression, that she reminded me of those women in the home-made pastel dresses whose children had been taken from a religious compound by the state—we had seen their pictures in the media not long before. I knew nothing about them, but somehow I had assigned to them a “type.”

I realize that my impression was odd: maybe it was the hair, I really am not sure--it was visceral. I felt she was more like these women than like me. She was just “not my type.” And in spite of my disgust at everything she says, this visceral reaction remains probably the primary reason I reject everything about her.

I acknowledge that the opinion I formed is classic pre-judging. To be fair, I’m willing to admit that some folks who viscerally feel that Barack is not their type have come to their conclusion no less honestly.

BTW, when my husband saw her, he was surprised; for him my description was 180 degrees wrong. All he hates is her politics.

midnightcajun said...

"...the cattiness, the seething venom" Yes, Rationalist, you nailed it. I've never understood how even those who agree with what she is saying are not repulsed by the blatant inner ugliness that woman displays. The sneering, the condescending contempt, the smug sense of superiority. But the Palinists don't see that; instead, they go on and on about how "sweet" she is, and I just shake my head and feel queasy.

Perhaps we really do inhabit two different worlds. The members of the Pee Zoo tend to be drawn from the ranks of those who fervently believe they are on the side of God and anyone who opposes them is a soldier of Satan. So I guess it doesn't bother them when they see Sarah sneering at what they think of as evil doers lined up on the side of the devil. These are the people who read the Left Behind series and cheer as millions are subjected to horrible, painful deaths. They, like Sarah, are sick. I just never realized there are so many of them. It's scary.

Ivyfree said...

"Anyone who would be so crazy as to go on the wild ride with those risk factors is insane. If we allow that she is not insane, then we must conclude that she is very careless and thoughtless at best. Not exactly VP candidate material."

WV: thonchav. The chav! FWIW, that's a term in Britspeak for a tacky, low-class person.

Another alternative is that she deliberately chose a course of action with a potentially lethal outcome. Although we know she didn't, because she wasn't pregnant.

vera city said...

My last comment seemed to really resonate with people and a lot of good observation came out of it. As a coincidence, the Palin tribute montage that Way of Peace referred to also surfaced yesterday and the comments at Immoral Majority and the Guardian are peppered with physical responses. The reason I brought this up is that we tend to dismiss our gut and other body feelings when we are presented with a psychopath. (Rationalist, that includes watching them on TV or reading about them.) We are conditioned to believe that this indicates a problem within us instead of the very reliable signs that the other person is a real threat. Victor E. Frankl - survivor of a nazi death camp, one of the founding developers of positive psychology, and author of Man's Search for Meaning (which I highly recommend) - observed that 'an abnormal reaction to an abnormal situation is normal.' Learn to listen to your gut.

People who have directly experienced other Personalities Disorders (PD), whether as family members or unrelated individuals, tend to react more strongly. But Omo was spot on by observing:

"But most of us do not have 'receptors' for that frequency and are freaked out by those who do.
It is part of the psychopath's game to negate the physical signals our bodies generate in response to their presence. Most of this happens on a level which, in general, we are not consciously aware of."

When I first started critically observing how personalities disorders affect others, I thought it was only those with direct traumatic histories who were responding. I discovered it was far more pervasive, it was fascinating that people with no such background were also being affected, but usually could not put a finger on what was bothering them. Frequently their feeling of uneasiness would cause them to turn on others instead of the person with the personality disorder. The PD would actually direct this feeling of anxiety to a person they designated as a scapegoat - usually the person who the PD perceives as a threat or, in a malicious act of cruelty, was vulnerable. Thus Obama pals around with terrorists and is the antichrist; Gryphen makes things up and is a potential pedophile; Audrey is a basement dwelling, pyjama wearing nut bar; Morgan and Shannyn are not only fat and unattractive (let's no forget Morgan's big teeth), but secretly lusting after Todd; and all of us here are envious of Sarah Palin's accomplishments which makes her the world's greatest. This is how to rally up the mob, who feel some momentary relief when they turn on the scapegoat. The relief is only temporary because they haven't identified the real source of their anxiety, the PD, and the cycle continues and usually escalates.

A story. Last October, after Sarah Palin had been a known public figure for less then six weeks, I was talking to a therapist who worked in a psychological trauma unit - seeing people who had been deeply, horribly traumatized usually in childhood. Even though Palin was a distant figure and would have little impact on these people, I asked if the clients were bringing her up. Indeed they were. There were bad dreams - even nightmares - and increased anxiety levels with flashbacks to earlier trauma. These individuals, and people like Rationalist's apolitical relative, are the canaries in the mineshaft that we should be paying attention to.

But back to Bristol's bolster chest.....

Doubting Thomas said...

I took three days of pictures(the day before the RNC, RNC and the day after the RNC)of Bristol Palin and turned them all the same direction, made them the same size for comparison.
You look and then tell me what you think.. or if you prefer

Personally, I look and I see this... or if you prefer

Doubting Thomas said...

Over the months my suspicions on the grey dress have gone from this (below), to the photo's I posted a few minutes ago..
She was dressed in another outfit, the family left the hotel and was at the RNC, when Bristol started to leak. There was an emergency panic, they cleaned her up, and the only dress available was the grey one, that they shoved her in quickly as time was running out. They hastily stuffed the dress to avoid another accident in front of the camera's and the grey dress is the final product of a hastily put together Bristol.

conscious at last said...

Yes, I agree with Doubting Thomas. BP's appearance was the result of a last minute mini-crisis response, as well as a clear lack of concern for BP on the part of all adults involved. Knowing that the "cameras of the world," would be there, and still allowing her to be seen like that was truly unacceptable.

B said...

Doubting Thomas and Yellowgirl,

I agree. I can see that empathy bra and belly on Bristol at the RNC. Other photos even show a line consistent with that bra. I believe the McCain campaign wanted to be sure she looked 5 months along.

I don't see towels on top of that padded bra device. I think the gray dress and the bra device together could create a bolster from Bristol's flesh. Just my opinion (though vera thinks I'm a male because of that opinion).

Here's the other black dress at the RNC. The empathy device could be there, too. But the empire waist and soft material, unlike the gray dress, don't push her flesh up:

Audrey said breasts get large early in the pregnancy. If Bristol had been pregnant sometime within the 9 months before the RNC, her muscles and skin might have still been loose so that she expanded quickly in late August, and could look 5 months along with the padding, even though 3.5 months.

Unless some more photos surface, I don't think we'll have an answer till Levi writes his book. But Bristol's looks at the RNC don't rule out that she had TriG.

sandra said...

Interesting questions about "gut" reactions to SP. I have always felt bad that I despise or envy women who are small in stature. I grew up to be 5'8" and rose from 135 lb. to 200+. I always felt that my envy was because of size.

At some point I learned that smaller women envied my height and deeper voice. But it didn't erase the insecurities I had during adolescence and beyond.

I have always been fascinated by SP's delicate hands and prancing abilities. This must have a cultural basis.

She seems to be the Barbie doll we didn't want our daughters to idolize.

If she had come across as an intellectual and someone of substance (e.g., Barbara Walters) I don't think the psyiognomy would have made so much difference.

This is a sort of "stream of consciousness" rant, but I hope Vera City can use it.

Amy1 said...

DoubtingThomas--just a fascinating arrangement of photos. Wow. Thank you!

Lynn said...

I like the explanation from Doubting Thomas--that the dress had been a plan B and was overstuffed in a frantic effort to avoid leaking. It just makes sense. I didn't realize that the belted/tarmac dress was on the same day as stuffed bolstert dress--is that the case?

Also, I agree about those of us who have experienced a PD parent, having a strong and immediate negative reaction to Sarah Palin like the canaries in the mineshaft. I've always suspected that all the stories about how supportive and happy the Palins, and particularly Sarah, are about this pregnancy were total lies. I can picture Sarah, behind the scenes, angrily and hastily stuffing that dress in a vengeful "take that you ungrateful blankety blank", "ruining my life with your selfishness." I noticed how relieved and grateful Bristol seemed when John McCain welcomed her on the tarmac. That's the way a kid in a crazy, hellish world reacts to normal people treating them the way normal people get treated.

The visceral reaction hit me immediately. I felt cold fear, knowing how easily people like that get away with their lies and posing. In my life, one Sarah- like person has actually had some character growth ( I'm struggling to adjust) and the other one will never change. never.

The scary thing about Sarah is that she's had this pathology fed and reinforced by all the attention and fame and money. I wish she would have a total meltdown but I suspect we could wait forever. That said, I will do everything in my power to bring out the truth and hopefully keep Sarah from attaining any more power.

Amy1 said...

VeraCity: Most of the otherwise normal-seeming friends I mention the SP babygate issue to turn me off with an immediate "No, I'm done with her, don't want to talk about her," with the implication that I'm pretty weird if I do. Many of us have mentioned this as the tinfoil hat thing we have experienced, even within ourselves. Do you think your explanation extends to that being the reason for no MSM coverage?

I can see how it might be, but I always thought it was a little more due to fat cats saying no, papers not wishing to be wrong, or be first -- along the lines we saw in the difficulty of Watergate unfolding within the Washington Post -- and they had brave, principled editor/owner in Ben Bradlee/Katharine Graham. Not so, now, in many places, I think, esp where Murdoch owns them.

Can you comment of why no MSM coverage from the perspective of your insights?

HollyP said...

@midnightcajun "The members of the Pee Zoo tend to be drawn from the ranks of those who fervently believe they are on the side of God and anyone who opposes them is a soldier of Satan. So I guess it doesn't bother them when they see Sarah sneering at what they think of as evil doers lined up on the side of the devil."

Last fall Christine Todd Whitman appeared on a PBS show (Now With David Brancaccio, I believe) and talked about this. The religious right believes so strongly that they are on the side of God, and therefore those with other opinions/beliefs/who support other policies must be on the side of the devil, that they cannot compromise. Thus, Sarah Palin = their side = on God's side.

However, the questions and answers related to Bristol are a sideshow. The real issue is that a woman who, at worst, lied baldly to the public; and at best, exhibited extraordinarily poor judgment, must be kept out of positions of public leadership. Proving that she either lied, or proving exactly how bad her judgment was, is critical to this effort.

Amy1 said...

My initial reaction to SP? I was hoping SO HARD that she would be good: I was already 100% for Obama, but as a woman who has seen the hard knocks in a lifelong career, I was just swooning with hope that her twangy speech indicated she was a wise Will Rogers type, that her glasses were a sign that she did not want to trade on her beauty, her simple words showed she wished to state complex things simply (as Einstein sometimes did). I confess I was slow to catch on, but I was in canoe country with little access to news.

I was more attracted to her as a successful woman than I was repelled by the things that did not fit. Later I realized so much more. But I am a poor judge of character. So vera city's insights are fascinatng. Thx vc.

omo said...

Punkinbugg -- can't help you on any photos of the events you mentioned, sorry, I did go to the Newsminer today to order a copy of the photo of Sarah & Todd & Trigg at the 2008 Governor's Picnic and surprise surprise, that photo was not digitally archived for the date it ran in the paper ! When I have time i'll go through the microfilm, now i'm wondering if even the whole print run had it (we get an early print run, the archived copies are probably later versions).

vera city -- you are so exactly right, and i am speaking as the 'vulnerable scapegoat' of my very disturbed mother in law, who has for many years managed to divert her entire family's dis-ease onto me. Of course she plays the mother card too (ala Sarah), as in "I'm the mother, you can't think anything bad about me !" And, as has been said of Sarah, she can be VERY charming. When she wants to be. This experience has caused me to look past the individual to the concept of 'psychopathy is a frequency, some resonate to it, most do not.'

Doubting Thomas -- very nice timing, after vera city's 'back to the bolstered bust' ! I think you may be onto something ! An emergency wardrobe replacement does make sense. And if the major 'leak' had already occurred, then Bristol wouldn't be too uncomfortable. Wonder if there was somebody backstage wearing just a slip because Bristol was in their dress ?

mlewis said...

I like the set of pictures of Bristol offered by Doubting Thomas. If anything, in the arrival picture where Bristol is wearing that satin shiny blouse, her bust line is, well to put it not so politely, out there. If anything it looks bigger that the so-called bolster picture. Pictures taken later in her pregnancy don't show such a big bust line, and that would be the time when she would be getting bigger, not smaller.

I like the explanation of a sudden change of dress, and filling it out, stuffing it to prevent leaking, anything last minute. It was too tight and didn't fit her well, so it speaks to a last minute choice or change. Anything could have happened: leaking, baby spit up, accidental bottle spilling. Leaking is most likely because of the response- towels.

The story about the wild ride didn't make sense. Sarah's leaving office in the middle of her term doesn't make sense. And, Bristol's Bolster Bust Line doesn't make sense, either.

Emma said...

Long time reader, haven't posted in a bit. Thanks to all for the continued work and discussion.

I've been torn between the "padded to prevent visible leakage" and "padded to look more pregnant to quiet the rumors" theories.
When I saw Bristol both on stage and sitting that night, my first and really only reaction was she must be breastfeeding. I've seen lots of breastfeeding moms whose chests are unusually large, but never a teenager who was "about 5 months along" with her first pregnancy.

Recently I had seen photos of another young woman wearing very similarly cut dresses--short-sleeved, fairly fitted, zipped up the back, neutral color, plain cut--and who was present at the RNC. It struck me that maybe this woman had loaned Bristol the gray dress. But, I couldn't figure out why. Why would this person loan Bristol a dress instead of Bristol wearing one picked out by handlers? Then Doubting Thomas's post--maybe Bristol arrived wearing one dress, leaked and had to borrow a dress at the last minute.

But, from whom? What other young woman would have been at the RNC with a busload of similarly cut, similarly shaped dresses, and been available to loan a dress at the last minute? I'm sure you know who I am referring to. I hesitate to name this person because a) I assume she is more than tired of people commenting on her chest and shape, b) based on a recent statement by her regarding SP, I'm positive she wants absolutely nothing to do with this story, and c) frankly, I like her spunk. Check out recent photos
and photos from the campaign to see if you have a similar reaction.

And, maybe having to loan the dress is part of the reason for her statement referenced in b).

GinaM said...

I guess I need to add my two cents to the fabulous "vera city" post about reactions to the Crazy Ex-Gov. Lady.

My daughter who is 18 commented on my face when she saw me watching the Crazy Lady giving her quitting speech. I looked in the mirror and I guess the best way to describe my expression would be "open mouth disbelief".

I can't stand her voice. I can't look at her and listen to her talk, it really "hurts my head". I found that when I do look at her when she talks all I hear is gibberish. It's like she's speaking a foreign language!

Another point I like to make about Bristol's bust size. I breast fed my children (my youngest is 8)and I couldn't use the breast pads, to much chance of leakage. I would use a cloth diaper and put it inside my nursing bra, so maybe they (stylist, Crazy Lady?) used a towel to keep her from leaking.

I know that I cannot wait for the this story to end. This is almost as good as waiting for J.K. Rowlings finishing up the last Harry Potter book!! And boy was that book worth the wait!

nilap said...

I apologize if this has been discussed before, but the picture in Cornerstone 2 of the family walking on the sidewalk (going to church?) sure looks to me like Willow with her hands in her pockets and not 9 month pregnant Bristol.

jeanie said...

Vera -

Great post and very interesting research. Thanks!

There is a woman i've worked with for 20 years and from day one I've never felt comfortable around her. Sarah Palin reminds me very much of her - totally self-absorbed, interpreting things in a defensive way, occasionally extremely friendly but quick to turn and go on the attack. It's nice to have an explanation for the visceral reaction I have towards people like this.

As for physical reactions to Sarah Palin - yes - nausea, clenching jaw, and a general feeling of creepiness. And any time I see a quote of hers, I hear it read in that grating voice in my head and all the anxiety of the campaign comes rushing back!

Sarah said...

vera city -

Thank you so much for posting. I understand myself and my reactions to Sarah Palin much better because of you.

Anonymous said...


Interesting that you bring up Miss McCain. I had thought of her often in these posts about Bristol-- and what I imagined was that she may have been the first to witness how crazy the family was. That the Palin women may have let their guard down around her in the Bloggette's RV and let the lies flow-- Bristol's doing me a favor and breastfeeding Trig. It can be done, you know, and she's such a sweet girl to help out with her brother. Or some such crazy loon lie because that's what the Palin family is used to. And in the beginning Meghan McCain would have smiled through it (assuming her dad couldn't be that stupid) until finally it was all too much to ignore.

And yes, Meghan McCain could have supplied the dress at the last minute. . . If so (as I imagine it) what would keep her from spilling all this weird craziness? Protecting her father?

And Doubting Thomas, nice comparison photos. But the one thing that stands out to me is Bristol's face. How chubby it is in comparison to the slim-faced Bristol of earlier summer. . .very pregnancy-like.

Jen said...

I haven't answered the gut feeling about SP question yet. My initial feeling was PURE FEAR. I still feel that fear. As fun as it is to make fun of her, I truly fear her. From the second I saw her, I could feel the hostility, the smugness. I feared she would divide the country just as I felt Obama was trying to unite it. I knew that a beautiful woman with five kids was a scam on us. They were trying to get the Hillary supporters and I knew it. So immediately, I felt manipulated. The more I learned about her and the more I heard her speak, the more afraid I got.

I wasn't afraid she would win, I was afraid of what she would do along the way. People were (are) smitten. If any of you watch True Blood, she's like Marianne. She makes me uncomfortable and when I think of SP, I think of destruction. Thank goodness we've had Tina Fey, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. If we couldn't laugh at her, I'd be curled up in a bed waiting for the world to collapse around me.


Yellowgirl said...


Interesting thought about the other young lady traveling with the McCain team......... I can see her loaning a dress; they are/were probably similar in size at the time..........

I also very much wonder about her refusal to discuss SP. Things that make you go "huh"........

Headtrip Honey said...

Okay, I'm gonna admit right here and right now that I could be absolutely wrong.

But in this picture:

You can see something under Bristol's armpit. It may be just the edge of a camisole she was wearing under the dress, but it strikes me as a little high up.
It does, however, hit EXACTLY where the empathy belly Doubting Thomas posted would hit were she wearing one.

Again, this could be a total red herring, but it's just a little detail I never noticed before.

anne s said...

When Bristol did the Greta interview she was in a blue sweatshirt.. so you couldn't really see her .. uh Boobs but she obviously didn't look monsterously huge

Here's the thing.. yes boobs grow during pregnancy.. but when you breastfeed they can double in size.. become Melons vs Grapefruits

So if she was as "they say" pregnant at the RNC.. not Trig's mother.. and her big boobs were just a result of "pregnancy" .. although she was only 5 months along

AFTER Tripp was born ... I am sure she would of breastfed him (Mama bear liked to remind the world how she uses a breast pump.. so I am sure she would of encouraged her daughter to breastfeed)
then her boobs after his birth and whilst breastfeeding would of been GINORMOUS
They were huge at the RNC .. they would of almost doubled in size while breastfeeding
But you didnt see that..

Hope this makes sense

Leadfoot said...

Any theories on why Sarah seems to be in hiding? It's so unlike her.

Joe Christmas said...

amy1, I still think the MSM doesn't touch babygate because it would tear Spalin down and she is ratings and $$$$ to them, not to mention the RNC.

vera, you certainly have touched a nerve among us and made us all revisit our visceral reactions. And these are strong, limbic feelings. They are imbedded in our DNA to protect our survival.

But, I think it is the next step, too, that we reflect upon. At some point after our initial reactions, and what makes us truly human, is our critical analysis of her pathos and the fraud she tried (is trying) to foist on the American people. We all here seem reasonable, and thanks to you, have some new, deep Mental Health insights. Reasoning has overcome absurdity. We are all becoming stronger because of this process, i.e. the emotional, gut, blink instinct developing into a rational and evidence-based analysis of this sordid tale.

Courage and endeavour has entered into it as well. What Audrey did by starting this site and what you are doing to dissect Spalin's psyche is truly inspiring.
After all, it is the right and noble thing to do when you have convinction. We are thus moved above the simpletons when we act in such a manner.



Jen said...

Leadfoot -- Divorce is a hard thing to go through. ;)


Punkinbugg said...

Thanks for the collage of Bristol pix, Doubting Thomas.

Like my daughters who are about the same age, I notice that she wears either a black or white undershirt in every picture.

Most days, my girls have on a minimum of 2, sometimes 3 tank tops or camisoles in addition to their bras, especially under shirts that have a deep V-neck or scoop.

I'm just saying - - she might be covering up an empathy belly, she might not. She might be Mormon! Don't they have special underwear, too? LOL

wv: UNBRA. No kidding!!

NY tabloid chick said...

Vera city, I'm loving your analyses. My first reaction to SP was disappointment. I was an Obama supporter but respected McCain. And then this bitch comes out on stage, pretending she'd done even a fraction of what Hillary Clinton did, and being the snotty chick who was dating the nice quiet guy who was your friend, and she was just trying too hard to be snarky and fit in with the rest of the group... and you couldn't figure out how your sweet quiet friend didn't see what a snake she was. The sassy came off as an act, and my disappointment turned to anger. I can be a snarkster when provoked, and I just wanted to one-line her until she crawled back to her little town. I had that feeling that you get when you meet someone who's mentally 'off' in some way that you can't quite figure out right away, but you can tell that she's just a bad person.

Lynnie said...

I've been reading here for a long time, but I'm not sure if I've ever posted.

The comments here really struck a nerve with me. My PD Mom raised me to always feel like I was "walking on eggs" when I was growing up. I never knew what would set her off, so I grew up in a constant state of anxiety until I finally escaped from home by going to college.

That anxiety returns whenever I see or hear or watch Sarah Palin. I can't explain how scary I find her to be. I'm grateful that you folks have been talking about your visceral reactions to her ~~~ now I know that I am not alone.

I have a long-time friend that I can't associate with anymore. I now see that my friend has many of the same qualities that Sarah has, and wouldn't you know ~~~ she thinks that Sarah is just the greatest. She adores Michele Bachmann, too.

I just can't hang around with her anymore, and it makes me both sad and mad. How could I know this woman for 30 years and not see what she is really like?

LOL ~~ wv is 'unpin'

Eileen said...

OMO: Think the Newsminer in Fairbanks or ADN has photo of Palin at the Irondog Pre-Race Banquet in Anchorage Feb. 2008? I know she was at the banquet.
Maybe she is wearing indoor clothes and no cover-up in order to sit and eat with four time I.D. winner First Dude?
Anchorage folks: Could you ask ADN if photos of IronDog 2009 Pre-Race Banquet with Palin in shot?
It goes without saying-spectators and relatives of those who raced the Iron Dog should be patriotic enough to submit their shots of Palin Feb.2008 to Audrey for her experts to review.

This hoax is so much more than loyalty to a sport or Alaskan event, it is about personal and political party integrity as well as how our two choices on Presidential tickets are equally important when you are one illness or catastrophe away from a change in who holds the office. People who love Alaska were at the Iron Dog 2008 and took photos of Sarah Palin, please show that support to settle this national mystery.

Emma-yes, she who wants to make a difference in Republican Party and who tersely stated she doesn't EVER want to hear a question about HER knows much...she had a wild ride on the McCain campaign RV and her loyalty to dad's image is more important to her than loyalty to truth to America.
She wants a career in Political Show Biz and already thinks she sticks her neck out to take on some Rep. Party female loud mouths...She Who Won't Be to chicken to take on Sarah. When the Pregnant belly that wasn't finally Blows Up in the media glare-she would do better to come out ahead of it with evidence-as we ALL can see what a lousy job the Republicans did in vetting their Veep choice. She could do a double blow-to Palin as well as protect her dad's legacy as well as she can...just like the recent cheating politicians who come out and announce fire when there are rumors of smoke about some personal smoke.

COME ON,Meghan McCain and get it off your chest as well as Bristols'!! Blow Sarah outta the water and back into the backwoods of MSM media coverage and future considerations foranything but writing a Tell All book on herself.
That grey dress that Meghan might have loaned Bristol will become more famous than what's her name from Oval Office fame.
Barbie BoobieGate brings down another politician-progress!CaribouBarbie could crack thru the glass ceiling after all and have parity with the usual male cheating hypocrites.

Paper Pregnant said...

Haven't read the other comments yet, but I say this having worked on political campaigns before: I have picked out clothing for the candidate and his spouse. Without them being there to approve it beforehand. I have shown up just a short time before an event and handed several suits/dresses to a candidate's spouse for her to wear. It is HIGHLY likely that someone on the McCain campaign chose clothing for the Palin girls based solely on photos of them and their dress sizes, and that shopping may have even occurred before Bristol's pregnancy was common knowledge.

My most likely guess as to why Bristol looked the way she did is that she was not handed that dress until the last minute, and someone on the campaign freaked out at how pregnant it made her look. That dress was obviously NOT a maternity dress, and it probably emphasized her belly to such a point that it made the campaign uncomfortable. My guess is that with no time to shop for a new maternity wardrobe for Bristol, someone suggested that she pad her chest to make her belly look smaller.

Remember too that while Sarah was using Bristol's pregnancy to "prove" that Bristol could not be Trig's mother (and therefore she, Sarah, was), she was also walking a fine line with the Republican party's conservative base. The last thing the campaign would have wanted to do is draw a lot of attention to their VP candidate's unwed pregnant teen daughter.


deb said...

Megan McCain's dress! I can see it! great idea!

Headtrip Honey said...

Has anyone seen this pic before? I hadn't:

It's of Bristol and Levi, and I assume it's during the convention. She's not wearing the grey dress.

Her boobs, however, although they don't look quite as bolster-riffic, are still pretty freakin' huge.

Here's what I'm wondering.

They didn't break the Bristol story until Sept. 1, the same day the RNC kicked off.

I'm wondering if the stylists hadn't already bought a number of outfits for Bristol, but were unprepared for her pregnancy.

Enter Ms. McCain. Being the same size naturally as Bristol was pregnant (about), the stylists dipped into the outfits they had bought for Meghan. (because both the grey dress and the dress in the above pic seriously look like something she would wear!) Unfortunately, Meghan is a tad (understatement) more naturally "busty" than Bristol, so in order to avoid a sagging look, they quickly got a padded bra.

And yes, there ARE padded bras that can make you look that huge.

I am naturally a B cup (barely), but I have a silicone padded bra that makes me easily a C.

Bristol's breasts were already a little larger from pregnancy, so a bra like this could make her look gigantic.

I think the cut of the grey dress made her look awkward, as the pic above shows abnormally large breasts as well, but not ones that look unnatural. Just unnatural if you compare them to other pics of Bristol from the same time period.

I'm still not convinced, however, that she was as far along as they say she was.

comeonpeople said...

oh ladies and gentlemen, I love this site. It's reassuring to know there are critically thinking people left in this country.
RE: reactions to Scarah: Right off the bat I knew somethig was not right with her. I mean immediately. I was incredulous that a novice governor with an undergrad degree in journalism (that took 6 years and 5 schools to obtain,) was actually the VP candidate. HUH??? Then I chanced upon the wild ride story and my education as a pediatric nurse and my own experience having two children led me to believe she did not birth Trig. Then I became angry. Angry that many people in this country are so gullible and angry that we were being manipulated as a people and most of us were falling for it. Anger at the lack of critical thinking in this country. Anger at the impotent main stream media. Then, I just became incredulous after the Katie Couric interview and people were STILL gaga over her. I felt like I was seriously in the twilight zone. the only person who could not believe people were paying this idiot any mind, let alone going to vote for her.
I feel know like it is part of our collective mission, ofw hich I am a part, to expose this sicko and keep her far far away from any decisions that involve our country.
I was raised by a narcissitic PD mother and my buttons are pushed when I see her all dolled up in her heals and make-up while the kids are tossed under the bus.
Now, as far as the Bristol bolster dress. My opinion is that they dressed her in a gray dress , (which to me looks like a nuns habit), to tone Bristol down and made her look virginal and not a pregnant party girl. The big boobs I think are from an ill fitting add a size bra, possibly a wardrobe malfunction of the brs - the snaps coming undone and the thnig rides up and makes you look distorted. I haved unhooked my Victoria secret add a size bra and the thing rides up and adds like three sizes to you and you look just like Bristol did that night.
I'm not sure of the breastfeeding thing. I din't think the kid ever learned how to really breast feed. if anything, she was pumping and using the medella pump and bottles (excellent pick-up by the way. They are expensive and you only use them if you have the pump.) There were way better ways to dress her to disguise a potential leak. But snything is possible when the crazy Scarah is involved.

Karen said...

Read all the comments, adding a couple of my own. AGREE with strange progression of Bristol's baby bump, looks almost the same in Nov or Dec at Walmart, as at RNC.

Think her breasts are too higly padded to prevent nursing leak, all of this happened so suddenly, Wasilla to RNC in a day or two, freaking out about national appearance, more at ease in days to come. Main concern first night, no leaking on TV!

Medela bottles seem highly indicative of breast feeding, according to someone else posting. I think we can all exclude Sarah, leaving Bristol? Seems like important CLUE. No way is she 5 months at RNC, less farther along or no baby at all IMHO.

Happened to me twice, pregnant while still nursing (when older baby was one year old however). Doctors immediately suggested to stop nursing in that situation ASAP. Course with Down's baby, extenuating factors with sucking etc, still FOOLISH to risk current pregnancy by continuing to nurse. LOTS of questions to answer here.

No second baby at all? Should not be so difficult for SP to present two birth certificates, & end all speculation, there must be multiple issues. Thanks Audrey & all!

John said...

Fascinating Story! I am just a Johnny-Come-Lately; but if the first baby (Trig) is Bristol's and not Sarah's - why does he have Down's Syndrome? Or, is it not Down's Syndrome at all?

Windy City Woman said...

Maybe Bristol wore extra padding on the grey-dress day because she was going to have less time between bathroom breaks, but more time between bathroom breaks on the black-dress day.

comeonpeople said...

Audrey has done (I think) an extensive piece on the probability of Bristol vs Sarah having a trisomy 21 baby. There are actually peaks in the curve in very young and then older mothers. Bristol absolutely could have had a trisomy 21 baby, in fact she is likely way more fertile than her mom and odds support a Bristol pregnancy over a 44 year olds pregnancy. Factor in heavy alcohol and/or drug use on Bristol's part (party girl)and chances for maternalchromosomal non-dysjunction increase.

Shayfray said...

The most logical explanation to me is that they had to dispel ANY doubt that Bristol was pregnant on the day of the RNC.

In order for the ruse to distract from the questions around Trig's birth, Bristol had to look VERY pregnant, or at least very big in all areas.

They could leave no room for doubt that this girl was 5 months along and if the stomach wasn't big enough they'd add it in the breasts.

Bristol had to be significantly larger than the pictures that had already surfaced in which she had a bit of a belly (causing the debate about whether or not she was pregnant in those pics).

onething said...


Funny thing, I just ran into a 20-year-old with a Down's baby.

Lerual said...

Commenting about how I felt about Sarah, I was so hoping she was the "real thing." But in only a matter of days, I realized the woman was in way over her head. She was just another example of good looks pushing her farther than her ability. She is the queen of mixed messaging and this sents red flags up everytime I see the mixed messaging. I don't understand how a conservative Christian woman can spew forth such hatred and venom. I find her to be vile and actually get a sour taste in my mouth when her name is mentioned.

peony said...

Aside from the fact that Palin was inadequately vetted for the job that is a heart beat away from the US Presidency, what bothers me most about the Palin hoax is the cynical mobilization of people with Down Syndrome and their families for their symbolic value in presumably supporting Palin's politics.

People afflicted with DS have been mobilized and used as presumptive supporters of this figure and title simply because she “has” a DS child, as if she is or would ever be their champion. This makes the actual facts about whether or not she gave birth to him, whether she had any heart-rending and gut-wrenching decisions to face personally – not just one or two people away from it personally-- is a very big deal indeed. I'm sure it is difficult to learn that one's daughter, or son's girlfriend, is expecting a child with Down Syndrome, but if you went through it personally, in my opinion, you wouldn't use the term that the learning of it made you “sad.” You might more likely say that it devastated you.

I seriously doubt if any mother of a DS baby did not take one day off after the birth of such a child.

And Palin's embroideries and lies – specifically the one made up on the hot seat about the plane ride and car ride, a very long trip to an exceptionally easy birth, “in fact the easiest”; her bald-faced lie about how a woman (or rather, she herself, superstar) can work as governor, raise a DS child, and chew gum at the same time; “her” waffling consideration of abortion following “pre-natal testing” – are fiction. To suggest that her political stance, her religious views, or any plank in her party's platform (health care, genetic research, stem cell research, anyone) is or would be beneficial for individuals with DS or other developmental delays is outrageous. She proposed herself as, and was made by Republican image makers to symbolize, someone who is on the side of people with DS. Yet she has done nothing for anyone but herself. To see DS adults stand with placards made for them and wear “Trig” T-shirts, as if she would be an advocate for their needs, means that someone has mobilized them en masse to back her, not her back them. Just to compare, Eunice Shriver was not out to aggrandize herself, to buff her national image, and did not allow herself to be used to garner votes from families affected by birth defects.

Really, what would have been the disadvantage to her for saying that she and her husband adopted Trig. That would have been altruistic, even legal. Even if some embarrassing or distasteful details of how and with whom he was conceived were to come to light, at least adopting him would be doing the right thing. But legal adoptions take time, and cannot be accomplished on a self-serving timetable. All parties need to agree to let go of rights to and claims on the child to let the adoption take place. Letting this amount of time pass to that eventuality would have been fruitless for Palin's VP selection campaign, or for the election mass manipulation process. But to fake a belly, fake a birth, fake contractions, fake a momentary consideration of abortion, fake pangs of remorse, fake hair, fake a flute solo, fake and fake and fake again: that defines her.

Children and adults with Down Syndrome deserve better. They have very varied needs, individually and by age grouping. Families with members with DS are desperately in need of a health care system that addresses their needs. Palin is not the answer, especially if she has lied to the nation about her relationship to her DS child.– lied particularly to families with big issues relating to their child's care. There is no doubt that her family is raising Trig, perhaps TP more than anyone. But it is equally clear that she uses this group of people and their families for her own purposes, not to assist them as a group, or represent them in any way, but to raise her own profile. Getting rich is just a side benefit.

peony said...

What is the reality about raising a child with DS? According to an article linked in this website

“Judy Waldron, president of the Alaska chapter of the National Down Syndrome Congress, a support and education group … delivered a parent packet to the Palins in the hospital.”

What hospital? When did Ms. Waldron visit?

“They [the Palins] anticipate it and they kind of relish the challenge of having a child with special needs,” said Waldron, an Anchorage teacher whose 19-year-old daughter, Lyn, has Down Syndrome. While it's “no walk in the park,” the joys are great, she said. “Just the fact that they require such great effort to complete some simple tasks and that's real rewarding.”... “Some people call them “angel children,” straight from God,” Waldron said. “They are usually sweet-natured but can be ornery, like anyone.”

Reality, truthfulness, honesty regarding the needs of individuals with DS and the challenges facing their families is the only place you can start. Not with lies. Not with betrayal of the interests of the group.

Honesty about sex, conception, genetic testing. That's a foreign language to Palin.

CorningNY said...

Here is an interesting article about a woman who starved herself during her second pregnancy, and managed to not look very pregnant even just before giving birth. Like Sarah, she gained weight normally with her first baby.
I do not believe that Sarah gave birth to Trig; however, if she did, she may well have been severely restricting her food intake and maintaining a very rigorous exercise schedule to avoid looking pregnant and/or unconsciously try to hurt her baby. Either scenario does not reflect well on Sarah.

Ann Parker said...

I really think Trig is not Sarah's but I don't think he is Bristol's either. He looks like Todd. It would be so eqasy for someone to give birth and then hand himover to Todd and Sarah without causing media attention. It would spare Sarah from the embarassment of Todd having had an affair. This would also explain why Sarah does not defend The rumor that Bristol is Triggs mother. It is easier to let people believe that if it is not true than have them go after the possibly real truth. Trig looks like todd.

Lynn said...

Just wanted to send a little, "miss you" post. I miss your voice and orderly approach.