Sarah Palin's pals Diamond and Silk get kicked off Facebook after their videos are deemed "unsafe for the community."

.@DiamondandSilk: "If a privately owned bakery has to go against their Christian values to bake a cake, then Mark Zuckerberg is going to have to suck it up buttercup and allow Diamond and Silk to speak our truth." pic.twitter.com/LnukaSjwD4

— Fox News (@FoxNews) April 8, 2018

Courtesy of Raw Story:  

Diamond and Silk,” the two North Carolina sisters who have profitably promoted themselves as Donald Trump’s biggest fans, took to Fox & Friends and Twitter this weekend in a panic after Facebook determined their content –primarily videos — is “unsafe to the community,” causing their traffic to collapse while hitting them in the pocketbooks. 

The two, dubbed by MSNBC host Joy Reid as “Cubic Zirconia and Rayon,” (real names Lynnette “Diamond” Hardaway and Rochelle “Silk” Richardson), have become recognizable regulars on Fox News where they are notable for siting side-by-side and opining on the political topic du jour. 

However things have taken a turn for the worse in the past six months as Facebook informed the two that their videos are unacceptable on the social media site.

Not typically a fan of censorship, but I cannot say I am going to shed a tear over this.

 These two women are TERRIBLE!

I mean look who they hang out with.

Clearly Facebook is dead serious about cleaning up their platform.

I for one am going to pay closer attention to what I post on the Immoral Minority Facebook page.

Not looking to give anybody an excuse. 

Facebook is now banning women for criticizing men. Wait, what?

Courtesy of the Daily Beast: 

When comic Marcia Belsky sarcastically replied “men are scum” to a friend’s Facebook post back in October, she never anticipated being banned from the platform for 30 days. 

That was exactly what happened. 

Belsky was shocked at the severity of the punishment considering her relatively innocuous comment, and immediately spoke to her fellow female friends about the ordeal. They could relate. 

In the wake of the #MeToo movement, countless women have taken to Facebook to express their frustration and disappointment with men and have been promptly shut down or silenced, banned from the platform for periods ranging from one to seven days. 

Women have posted things as bland as “men ain’t shit,” “all men are ugly,” and even “all men are allegedly ugly” and had their posts removed. They’ve been locked out of their accounts for suggesting that, since “all men are ugly,” country music star Blake Shelton “winning the sexiest man isn’t a triumph.” 

“I personally posted men are scum in November and I received a seven day ban. It’s still ongoing. Two days and 23 hours left,” said comedian Alison Klemp. 

What the fuck Facebook?

Please do not try to protect men.

 "Men are shit, all men are ugly?" These are what they consider examples of criticism that men cannot handle?

We say nastier shit than that just to wind each other up all of the time. 

Trust me men need to be criticized. And if they can't take it they need to stop calling themselves men.

Taking a cue from Florida, Wisconsin has now asked some state workers to refrain from talking about "Climate Change."

State Treasurer Matt Adamczyk.

Courtesy of Bloomberg: 

Discussing climate change is out of bounds for workers at a state agency in Wisconsin. So is any work related to climate change—even responding to e-mails about the topic. 

A vote on Tuesday by Wisconsin’s Board of Commissioners of Public Lands, a three-member panel overseeing an agency that benefits schools and communities in the state, enacted the staff ban on climate change. “It’s not a part of our sole mission, which is to make money for our beneficiaries,” said State Treasurer Matt Adamczyk, a Republican who sits on the board. “That’s what I want our employees working on. That’s it. Managing our trust funds.” 

Adamczyk raised his concern at a public meeting on Tuesday that the board’s executive director, Tia Nelson, had spent on-the-job time working on global warming. Nelson did indeed work on climate change a bit in 2007 and ’08—at the request of the governor. Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle, who stepped down in 2011, appointed Nelson as co-chair of a global warming task force. “It honestly never occurred to me that being asked by a sitting governor to serve on a citizen task force would be objectionable,” she said.

I guess it also did not occur to her that Republicans are not known for having a logical response to talk concerning climate change. But then how could she when she was influenced by a devout tree hugger.

Nelson is the daughter of Gaylord Nelson, the U.S. Senator from Wisconsin who established Earth Day in 1970. For 17 years before joining the public land agency, she ran the Nature Conservancy's climate change initiative.

As I am sure many of you remember Florida pulled this same crap as well.

So apparently in the minds of conservatives if everybody will just stop talking about Climate change, then it will simply stop being an issue.

After all it worked so well when Ronald Reagan used that approach with AIDS back in the 1980's.

In Florida officials are banned from using terms "Climate Change" or "Global Warming" because you know that will change everything.

Florida before that phrase they are not allowed to use, and after.

Courtesy of the Florida Center for Investigative Reporting:  

The state of Florida is the region most susceptible to the effects of global warming in this country, according to scientists. Sea-level rise alone threatens 30 percent of the state’s beaches over the next 85 years. 

But you would not know that by talking to officials at the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the state agency on the front lines of studying and planning for these changes. 

DEP officials have been ordered not to use the term “climate change” or “global warming” in any official communications, emails, or reports, according to former DEP employees, consultants, volunteers and records obtained by the Florida Center for Investigative Reporting. 

The policy goes beyond semantics and has affected reports, educational efforts and public policy in a department that has about 3,200 employees and $1.4 billion budget.

I guess it's kind of like if you don't say the word "cancer" nobody dies, and if you don't say the word "morons" nobody knows how stupid the conservatives are.

Everyday I say "Well nothing could surprise me now." And everyday I am wrong.

President Obama on Sony's decision to pull "The Interview" from its Christmas release: "Yes, I think they made a mistake." Update!

Courtesy of NBC News:  

President Barack Obama said Friday that Sony Pictures Entertainment "made a mistake" by nixing the release of a comedic film after the company was hacked and received cyber threats. 

"Sony's a corporation. It suffered significant damage. There were threats against some of its employees," he said "I am sympathetic to the concerns that they faced. Having said all that, yes, I think they made a mistake." 

In a year-end press conference, Obama said that he wishes Sony had spoken to him before deciding to back down on the film "The Interview," which depicted a plot to assassinate North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. "I would have told them 'Do not get into a pattern in which you're intimidated by these kinds of criminal attacks,'" he said. "That's not who we are," he said. 

"That's not what America's about."

I agree with the President's remarks 100%.

Just like I did with George Clooney yesterday. 

By the way the Sony executives are none too thrilled that the President talked about them yesterday.

It must be noted that George R. R. Martin, author of the incredible Game of Thrones books, has offered to show The Interview in his own theater in Sante Fe, Mexico.

He also had this to say: 

"The level of corporate cowardice here astonishes me. It's a good thing these guys weren't around when Charlie Chaplin made THE GREAT DICTATOR. If Kim Jong-Un scares them, Adolf Hitler would have had them shitting in their smallclothes."

Well stated.

Update: It looks like Sony is rethinking their position in response to the President's remarks: 

Sony Pictures Entertainment has said it still wants to release its film The Interview which mocks the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, and it is considering alternative platforms. 

The remarks come after President Obama said the film company made a mistake by cancelling the movie's release.

That is somewhat different than what they were saying before. 

Larry Flynt, founder of Hustler magazine, is also jumping into the fray with a porn parody of The Interview: 

“If Kim Jong-un and his henchmen were upset before, wait till they see the movie we’re going to make,” Flynt said. “I’ve spent a lifetime fighting for the First Amendment, and no foreign dictator is going to take away my right to free speech.”

I guess when you've already taken a bullet, a little hacking seems quaint by comparison. 

Putin signs law which demands bloggers register with the government and lose their anonymity. Thanks Edward Snowden for giving him the idea.

Courtesy of the New York Times: 

Widely known as the “bloggers law,” the new Russian measure specifies that any site with more than 3,000 visitors daily will be considered a media outlet akin to a newspaper and be responsible for the accuracy of the information published. 

Besides registering, bloggers can no longer remain anonymous online, and organizations that provide platforms for their work such as search engines, social networks and other forums must maintain computer records on Russian soil of everything posted over the previous six months. 

“This law will cut the number of critical voices and opposition voices on the Internet,” said Galina Arapova, director of the Mass Media Defense Center and an expert on Russian media law. “The whole package seems quite restrictive and might affect harshly those who disseminate critical information about the state, about authorities, about public figures.” 

Mr. Putin has already used the pliable Russian Parliament to pass laws that scattered the opposition, hobbled nongovernmental organizations and shut down public protests. Now, riding a wave of popular support after hosting the Winter Olympics and annexing Crimea, he has turned his attention to regulating the Internet, as well as burnishing his credentials as the worldwide champion of conservative values. 

Aside from the Internet law signed Monday, the Russian leader signed a new profanity law that levies heavy fines for using four common vulgarities in the arts, including literature, movies, plays and television. 

Speaking in St. Petersburg in late April, Mr. Putin voiced his suspicions about the Internet, even while noting that it had become a public market of huge proportions. 

“You know that it all began initially, when the Internet first appeared, as a special C.I.A. project,” he said in remarks broadcast live nationally, before adding that “special services are still at the center of things.” He specifically thanked Edward J. Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor granted asylum in Russia, for revealing to the world how efficient the N.S.A. was at collecting information.

So this is the place that Edward Snowden ran to after fleeing America because he was morally outraged by the NSA spying.

A place that not only spies on EVERYONE coming across their borders, but also makes bloggers register their name with the government, and censors their websites.

Kind of like jumping out of the red, white and blue frying pan and into freaking Russia!

Anti-censorship group says book bannings are on the rise in US schools.

Courtesy of Raw Story:  

An anti-censorship group in America has reported a flurry of attempted book bannings in the last quarter of the year and has said there are increasing numbers of books being taken off school shelves that deal with race or sexuality or are written by “minority” authors. 

The Kids’ Right to Read Project (KRRP) is part of the National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) and says in November alone they dealt with three times the average number of incidents. To date in 2013, KRRP investigated 49 book bannings or removals from shelves in 29 states, a 53% increase in activity from last year. In the last half of the year the project challenged 31 incidents compared to 14 in the same period last year. 

Acacia O’Connor of the KRRP said, “Whether or not patterns like this are the result of co-ordination between would-be censors across the country is impossible to say. But there are moments, when a half-dozen or so challenges regarding race or LGBT content hit within a couple weeks, where you just have to ask ‘what is going on out there?’” 

Among the books which have been complained about were Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man, Toni Morrison’s The Bluest Eye, Alice Walker’s The Color Purple, Sherman Alexie’s The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, Isabel Allende’s The House of the Spirits and Rudolfo Anaya’s Bless Me, Ultima. 

Most of the challengers were parents of district students or library patrons, though a handful were local or state government officials. Of the more than two dozen incidents KRRP faced from September to December, the majority involved materials used in classroom instruction. 

“It has been a sprint since the beginning of the school year,” said O’Connor. “We would settle one issue and wake up the next morning to find out another book was on the chopping block.”

I know what's going on out there.

The Religious Right are rapidly losing ground and are trying desperately to keep the youth from discovering that there is nothing wrong with being gay or not white, before they have a chance to get their clutches into them and poisoning their little minds.

If they want to ban a book full of disgusting sexual imagery, genocide, and attempts to brainwash the youth of America perhaps they ought to start with this one.

Just saying.

Six wonderful books banned by Christian influenced school boards and the reasons why.

Here is the list courtesy of Mad Mikes America:

1. The Invisible Man.

Reason: Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man is a masterpiece that captures the grim realities of racial discrimination in 20th-century America. Unfortunately, thanks to a ban passed by the local board of education, school kids in Randolph County, N.C, won’t be able find that novel in their library. An angry parent objected to the book’s sexual content and lack of innocence, and the school board agreed to ban the book by a vote of 5-2 with one of the board members, Gary Mason, a scholarly man no doubt, stated: “I didn’t find any literary value.”

Such a great book! I read it when I was young and have recommended to to kids for years. Morons!

2. The entire Tarzan series.

Reason: Edgar Rice Burroughs’ classic series about a man living in the jungle was pulled from the shelves of a public library in the appropriately named town of Tarzana, Calif. Authorities thought the adventure stories unsuitable for youngsters, since there was no evidence that Tarzan and Jane had married before they started cohabiting in the treetops. Ralph Rothmund, who ran Burroughs’ estate, protested that the couple had taken marital vows in the jungle with Jane’s father serving as minister. “The father may not have been an ordained minister,” said Rothmund, “but after all things were primitive in those days in the jungle.”

Yes we can't have children emulating this kind of behavior by running off to the wilds of Africa, meeting a young woman, and cohabiting in the treetops with her, now can we?

By the way the Tarzan books were my favorites as a kid and I read all of them, and watched every one of the movies, religiously.

I could even do a rather impressive impression of the Tarzan yell. Used the scare the crap out of the neighborhood dogs.  (Well it was either the yell or the fact I was standing in my backyard in my underwear with a butter knife slipped into the waistband. True story.)

3. Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl.

Reason: The book has been challenged numerous times for sexually explicit passages, and, in 1983, the Alabama State Textbook Committee called for rejecting the book because it was “a real downer.”

Yes what a downer. I mean it certainly had no redeeming value as a lesson on prejudice, or adolescence, or human suffering, or anything like that right?

To be serious it is a book that EVERYBODY should read once in their life. Or perhaps more than once

4. Twelfth Night by William Shakespeare

Reason: School authorities in Merrimack, N.H. found nothing amusing about Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night, in which a girl washes ashore after a shipwreck, disguises herself as a page, and falls in love with her male master. That jolly cross-dressing and fake-same-sex romance was deemed in violation of the district’s “prohibition of alternative lifestyle instruction,” and copies of the play were pulled from schools

Cross-dressing, and faux gay sex stuff must be stopped don'tcha know.

After all nothing says you are receiving a well rounded education quite like raging homophobia, and a fear of literary classic, right?

5. Charlotte’s Web

Reason: A parents group in Kansas decided that any book featuring two talking animals must be the work of the devil, and so had E.B. White’s 1952 work barred from classrooms. The group’s central complaint was that humans are the highest level of God’s creation, as shown by, they said, the fact we’re “the only creatures that can communicate vocally. Showing lower life forms with human abilities is sacrilegious and disrespectful to God.”

WTF? Charlotte's Web?  And since when are animals talking "sacrilegious and disrespectful to God?"

Haven't these idiots ever watched a Disney film?

Scratch that, they probably haven't stepped foot in the "Devil's Cinema" in years.

6. The Harry Potter series

Reason: While pretty much every child was devouring the final book in the Harry Potter series in 2007, one school was pulling all seven Potter books from its library shelves. The pastor of St. Joseph School in Wakefield, Mass., deemed their sorcery-heavy story-lines inappropriate for a Catholic school. Parents said the pastor thought most children were “strong enough to resist the temptation,” but his job was to “protect the weak and the strong.” 

Yeah well this one was a gimme wasn't it? After all Christians have been freaking out about this series since the very first one hit the bookstores.  And do you remember that trio of young exorcists who were going to England to battle the forces of Harry Potter?

Of course these are wonderful books as well, and they have been worth their weight in gold considering how they encouraged so many youngsters to step away from their televisions and start reading again.

So those are the books that certain religious types want to keep out of the hands of students.

And yet the book that these people would endorse without question, and would insist that EVERY student read from cover to cover, is the Bible.

You remember the Bible right?  It is the book that has great moral stories like this one:

Source

Yeah but of course it doesn't contain any sorcery, talking animals, or sex right?

Wait....

"The pornography of Anne Frank." Wait, what?

Courtesy of Christian Post:  

The Anne Frank Diary is 'pornographic' according to one mother who has lodged a formal complaint over the book being used in school to educate her own child. 

Mom, Gail Horalek, has filed a formal complaint against her daughter's school district over its use of the Anne Frank Diary, saying that many of the passages contained in the book are far too graphic for seventh graders like her daughter. 

The mother highlights one part of the book in which Frank discusses discovering her genitalia, and Horalek has said it is akin to pornography, and is completely inappropriate for her child and her schoolmates. 

She has complained that Meads Mill Middle School should have asked parents to sign a permission slip before they assigned the book to the children to read, due to the content. 

She has said, "The problem is the school is giving the seventh graders inappropriate material and not explaining it to the parents," according to the Northville Patch. 

Horalek has explained that the school has sent permission slips home for parents to sign when they have looked to use various other books and films that may contain strong material that some could deem "inappropriate." 

Apparently the part of the book that has so offended this lunatic is this portion:  

“What’s even funnier is that I thought urine came out of the clitoris … When you’re standing up, all you see from the front is hair. Between your legs there are two soft, cushiony things, also covered with hair, which press together when you’re standing, so you can’t see what’s inside. They separate when you sit down and they’re very red and quite fleshy on the inside.”

Okay look I think I know a little something about pornography, after all I am immoral, but if reading about the terrible fate of this young woman gets your juices going, you may have MUCH more to worry about than appropriate reading materials.

This is simply an honest description of a young woman writing about discovering her body parts. and in no way does it come off as salacious or prurient. At least no in my world.

This mother is obviously deeply disturbed and it makes me wonder how she handles all of those Donald Duck cartoons where the foul fowl is constantly running around without any pants on?

Here is the part that REALLY get me:

Horalek has now demanded that the book be removed from the curriculum: "It doesn't mean my child is sheltered, it doesn't mean I live in a bubble and it doesn't mean I'm trying to ban books." 

Yes, yes it does! If you are demanding that a book be removed from a library, then you are by DEFINITION banning books!

You know if this idiot would spend more time on her reading comprehension, instead of focusing all of her attention on combing books for the mention of genitalia, she MIGHT have been able to figure that out for herself.

New York Senate bill aimed at destroying anonymity on the internet.

Courtesy of CBS News:

New York state lawmakers have proposed a ban on anonymous online comments. Called the Internet Protection Act (A.8688/S.6779), the legislation would require a web site administrator to pull down anonymous comments from sites, including "social networks, blogs forums, message boards or any other discussion site where people can hold conversations in the form of posted messages." 

The bill states: 

A web site administrator upon request shall remove any comments posted on his or her web site by an anonymous poster unless such anonymous poster agrees to attach his or her name to the post and confirms that his or her IP address, legal name, and home address are accurate. All web site administrators shall have a contact number or e-mail address posted for such removal requests, clearly visible in any sections where comments are posted.

This is just the latest attack on free speech and privacy on the internet. I am sure that most of you remember the SOPA legislation that was proposed earlier this year and soundly defeated possibly as a direct result of a backlash from all over the internet.

Supposedly THAT legislation was designed to protect intellectual property and stop online piracy, but of course it would have done much more and seriously impacted our Constitutionally protected rights of free speech.

This time they found a different excuse to shut us up.  

Among the bills' sponsors are New York Assemblyman Dean Murray and Sen. Thomas O'Mara, who say the proposed law is to fight cyberbullying. "Cyberbullying has become one of the great tragedies of the Internet age," O'Mara said at a press conference. 

"Numerous national studies tell us that upwards of 40 percent of students have experienced some form of cyberbullying at least once, and they feel helpless in the face of it. Victims of anonymous cyberbullies need protection. We're hopeful that this legislation can be helpful to the overall effort to deter and prevent anonymous criminals from hiding behind modern technology and using the Internet to bully, defame and harass their victims."

Everybody wants to stop cyber bullying, myself included, but THIS is clearly just an excuse to take away the rights of citizens to spread information not controlled by giant media conglomerates as well as our right to speak out and share our opinions without fear of retribution by those who want to shut us up.

By the way I have little concern this will pass, but be warned that it is just one of many attempts coming down the pike to gain control of the internet, which in my opinion is possibly the greatest tool to ensure free speech since the invention of the printing press.

Something that BOTH Conservative and Liberal bloggers can agree on, SOPA must be stopped now!

Courtesy of Politico:

The conservative and liberal blogospheres are unifying behind opposition to Congress’s Stop Online Piracy Act, with right-leaning bloggers arguing their very existence could be wiped out if the anti-piracy bill passes. 

“If either the U.S. Senate’s Protect IP Act (PIPA) & the U.S. House’s Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) become law, political blogs such as Red Mass Group [conservative] & Blue Mass Group [liberal] will cease to exist,” wrote a blogger at Red Mass Group. 

Some have asserted that the controversial measures would criminalize pages and blogs that link to foreign websites dedicated to online piracy. In particular, this has concerned search engines like Google, which could face massive liability if some form of the bill passes, some say. 

“Of course, restrictions of results provided by Internet search engines amount to just that: prior restraint of their free expression of future results. Google and others, under SOPA, are told what they can or can’t publish before they publish it. Kill. The. Bill,” conservative blogger Neil Stevens argued at RedState. 

Liberals had their own spin on it, cheering on the fact that corporate support for SOPA was starting to subside. 

In particular, GoDaddy, a domain registration firm, suffered a spectacularly bad round of PR when it came out in support of the measures. But after a grass-roots campaign to boycott the firm, driven by Reddit, an online community, and others, GoDaddy reversed course and renounced its support. 

“Some good news on the SOPA front: Its corporate base of supporters is starting to crumble,” David Dayden wrote at Firedoglake. “GoDaddy is not alone. Scores of law firms are requesting their names be removed from the Judiciary Committee’s official list of SOPA supporters.

” In the blogosphere, the trajectory of the bill seemed set — that it is destined for failure if the pressure of the online community is kept up. 

This may be one of the most important issues facing those of us who love the internet, and rely on its ability to disseminate information freely.  If this law passes I would not even be able to cut and paste this article to share it with you. Even though I have little doubt that the author, Tim Mak, would like as many people as possible to read it.

It would most likely force small blogs, like this one, to shut down, and even make those with a larger internet presence, such as Google dramatically reduce how much information they made available.

The Reddit community has really taken point in this matter and is now encouraging its vast number of "Redditors" to target individual House members who support the controversial bill:

"Let's pick ONE Senator [who] voted for NDAA/SOPA and destroy him like we're doing for GoDaddy," Reddit user digitalboy wrote yesterday. "Relentlessly investigate and find skeletons in his closet, money bomb is opponents, etc."

My gut feeling is that this bill will die well before it comes even close to becoming a danger to free internet speech.  However I will continue to pay close attention to SOPA until I know that it has breathed its last, and also keep my eye out for any similar bills which threaten our ability to freely exercise our First Amendment rights.

Just how carefully censored IS Sarah Palin's Facebook?

I found this article over at CBS News:

How much work does it take to keep everything so sanitized? To help me find out, my colleague Jeremy Singer-Vine wrote a program to capture comments to Palin's page before the clean-up crew could arrive. (Here's an explanation of how Jeremy's program works.) All these posts were initially public, if only for a few minutes. We looked at the comments to 10 Palin posts over 12 days, capturing the deletions in the 24 hours after the posts were live. In that period, a rough average of 10 percent of total posts were deleted.

The deletions amount to a real-time look at how much effort and care Palin puts into protecting her public image. It's not just the number of posts that are screened out that gives some indication of how seriously Palin's team is monitoring things. The superfine mesh through which posts are sifted also gives an indication of the work involved. You don't get erased just for using vulgarity or pushing spam (which Facebook might remove anyway if flagged). The kinds of posts that are likely to get you removed from the Palin comments section can be divided into categories (the comments have not been edited):

Mean comments about Sarah Palin. "Please go away from my wall. I do not like you or agree with any dumb thing you say or do."

Mean things about the people who say mean things about Sarah Palin. "if you dont like her posts LEAVE THE GROUP DUMBASS!!!!"

Racial or ethnic slurs. "America's greatest threat is Marxism and International Jewry/Zionism! We will never regain our Liberty and Freedom until we expel every Jew from America!"

Polite disagreement. "Sarah, perception is everything! I learned that in the military. All you have to do is disassociate yourself from those Tea Partiers that are indeed racist and the NAACP gones [sic] away," wrote one in response to Palin's post on the NAACP's charge that the Tea Party tolerated racism. "Even they [the NAACP] admit the Tea Party is not a racist organization. Mrs. Palin, I believe you to be an honorable Woman. You believe in your cause. Sometimes for the good of the cause one has to make a stand even to those that support the cause. Remember John Mccain, circa 2008 in which a woman stood up and called Candidate Obama a Muslim. The Honorable John Mccain rebuked her. This could be your moment."

Too much agreement. "Do us a favor Sarah, trap a few Wolves and ship em to D.C., they do eat Rats don't they? Have a great trip Sarah, God Bless."

Criticism of her children. "please dont let your daughter do a reality show :( but i love your family and you ..hope thats just a rumor from the liberals."

Anything about Obama's birth certificate or conspiracies related thereto, even in muted form. "Just so we're clear, Conspiracy theories about Obama's refusal to release his college records--lunacy. Conspiracy theories about Trig Palin--journalism."

Complaints about her endorsements of so many female candidates. "I am beginning not to like you (Sarah). You have endorsed every women candidate running. You are looking quite biased." (Actually, she's endorsed as many men as women.)

Excessive use of religious prophesy or imagery. "The ones I feel for is one day those in the media that are doing the way they are will come down .you are a threat to them and their evil ways. David only needed 5 stones to bring down the giant. and i belive those five stones had on them five letters JESUS. The road may get hard but one day you will know God gave you that to walk."

Amazing!  I knew that they were heavily censoring comments, I have been told that by many of my readers, but even I did not realize just how controlled that page really was.

I definitely suggest that you read the entire article.  There are some fascinating bits about the editors NOT allowing positive remarks about Huckabee, as well as the deletion of comments complaining about the censorship of their comments.

Could you just IMAGINE what kind of presidency a President Palin would provide to this country?  It just makes your skin crawl to consider, doesn't it?