Green Room

Sarah Palin Needs to Help Conservative Bloggers So We Can Make Stuff Up, Too

posted at 5:42 am on August 2, 2009 by

Many Republicans have been heard to complain recently, “Hey, what’s wrong with you conservative bloggers? How come you can’t just make stuff up the way those left-wingers do? You need to get with this 21st-century Web 2.0 thing, OK?”

Yesterday, we discovered the problem: Conservative bloggers don’t have “sources” the way progressives do. Take for instance, the highly influential blog called Immoral Minority, which has been rockin’ the Site Meter lately. Their secret? Sources:

Earlier this week one of my best sources claimed to have explosive new information for me . . .

According to my source Sarah is finished with Todd and has decided to end their marriage . . .

As for the babygate story . . . my sources are still working on it, and the information is becoming more accessible . . .

It’s all about “sources,” you see. Which is a big problem for conservative bloggers, because for some reason we can’t get any sources with intimate details of the marriages of prominent Democrats. Whereas the lefty bloggers make it look easy to find sources who know everything about Todd and Sarah Palin. Just check out CNN stringer/blogger Dennis Zaki:

AlaskaReport has learned today that Todd Palin and former Alaska governor Sarah Palin are to divorce. Multiple sources in Wasilla and Anchorage (including a former Palin staffer) have confirmed the split.

Wow. So Friday night, the Immoral Majority gets this big scoop from one of their “best sources,” posts it at 6 a.m. Saturday morning, and within hours, Zaki’s story with “multiple sources” is the top item at Memeorandum!

Behold the awesome power of “sources,” ye conservatives, and tremble in fear!

But wait, what’s this? Palin spokeswoman Meg Stapleton issues a statement:

There is no truth to the recent “story” . . .  that the Palins are divorcing. The Palins remain married, committed to each other and their family . . .

Ah, but Stapleton is not “sources,” is she? Nor is this person quoted by some conservative bloggers:

Divorce Todd? Have you seen Todd? I may be just a renegade hockey mom, but I’m not blind!”
SARAH PALIN, 5:35 p.m. ET

Sorry, Mrs. Palin, this simply won’t do the job in the New Media environment. Anything said by someone with an actual name can never trump “sources,” as the amazing Immoral Minority demonstrated with a subsequent update:

Update3: I just talked to my source again and learned the following.
Sarah and Todd will not be making their break up official for some time. . . .
However Todd is currently sleeping on the couch and, though they are still occupying the same house, the temperature is below freezing, if you get my drift. . . .

Doggone that “source”! Why is it that only progressives know where Todd is sleeping? Why can’t any conservative bloggers get sources to tell them this kind of important stuff?

Myself, I didn’t sleep with my wife last night because I didn’t sleep at all. I’ve been working non-stop ever since I found out about this big story — and not from my sources, but from these highly reliable progressive bloggers who seem to have a monopoly on that “source”-type action. Transcript of a Saturday afternoon phone conversation:

ME: “Why didn’t you tell me about this divorce thing?”

SOURCE: “Because it’s not true.”

ME: “What?”

SOURCE: “It’s completely false.”

ME: “Completely false? Can I quote that? Is it authorized?”

SOURCE: “They already issued an official denial.”

ME: “Crap.”

SOURCE: “What?”

ME: “So, not only didn’t you call me first about the rumor, you also didn’t call me first about the denial.”

Why is it that my sources never seem to understand how this whole New Media thing works? Let’s face it, Mrs. Palin, as long as those progressive bloggers are getting up-to-the-minute briefings on the temperature at the Palin residence — if you get my drift — while somebody who has posting privileges here at Michelle Malkin’s Hot Air can’t even get the first phone call on the denial, how do you expect us to beat those guys in terms of making stuff up?

Now, here’s my idea: I told my source to give my phone number to . . . uh, two sources in Wasilla, Alaska, if you get my drift. Because I’ve made my living as a professional journalist since 1986, I’m not really so good at this newfangled making-stuff-up business, but I’d be willing to give it a try:

MONDAY, AUG. 3, 2009, 4:34 P.M. — Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and husband Todd “went at it like crazy” Sunday evening at their home in Wasilla, according to one source familiar with the couple’s rendezvous.

“Man, I don’t know what got into her last night,” said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “I’ve never seen anything like it before. No, wait, maybe that time we went camping back in . . . ’96. Yeah, I’m pretty sure it was ’96, but it might have been ’97. Anyway, the thing is, it was awesome.”

Palin spokeswoman Meg Stapleton refused to comment on the allegation.

UPDATE 6:17 P.M. — I now have further confirmation of the previously reported romantic encounter between the Palins, although one of my best sources disputes key details of our earlier account.

“Me? He said it was me?” said the source. “Oh, no way, it was totally him. You betcha. All I did was put on an old Rod Stewart CD while I was cooking the fish we caught last weekend, and next thing ya know, he’s singin’ along about ‘tonight’s the night’ and stuff. Of course, he can’t sing worth a darn, but he doesn’t know that.”

According to this source, Todd Palin “came up behind” the former governor, put his arms around her and began kissing her neck “all sweet-like” which caused the 2008 Republican vice-presidential candidate to laugh.

“Like I don’t know what you’re up to, Mister,” Mrs. Palin reportedly said.

Todd Palin was obviously seeking to make amends for previous neglect, according to this source. A four-time Tesoro Iron Dog snow-race champion, the governor’s husband “was trying to make up for lost time, I guess, because . . . well, he sure as heck wasn’t complaining, I can tell you that. You betcha.”

Asked about the apparent discepancy with Hot Air’s original report, the first source confirmed these new details.

“Whatever, man,” the first source said. “All I’m saying is, well, he shoots, he scores, right? Standing ovation, you might say.”

Further developments in the new scandal will be reported as details become available.

UPDATE 7:42 P.M.:– Still more confirmation from a new source.

“Ewwwww, gross,” said someone familiar with Sunday evening’s events. “Like, it’s bad enough when you can hear ’em in there, like I don’t know, OK? I just turned up my iPod and was like, whatever.”

While only indirectly confirming the controversial encounter between Mrs. Palin and the man the former governor still calls “First Dude,” this new source revealed a potentially intriguing angle involving Bristol Palin’s ex-fiance Levi Johnston.

Characterizing Johnston as a “total loser,” this source suggested it is extremely unlikely the father of Bristol’s infant son will ever “get his crap together.”

“Oh, puh-leeze! You’re talking ‘Ricky Hollywood,’ OK? I was like, ‘What’s up with that?’ . . . He’s supposed to be doing some kind of reality TV thing, and I’m like, right. They need to call it ‘America’s Biggest Jerk,’ ya know?”

Also confirmed was that the reported breach between Bristol and Johnston is “definitely” permanent. “Not in a million flippin’ years,” said the source, adding that Johnston had not “bought the first flippin’ diaper” for their son, Tripp.

Hot Air will continue to provide exclusive coverage of these controversies, including rumors that the Palins’ 14-year-old daughter Willow thinks pop musician Joe Jonas is “totally to die for.”

Anyway, Mrs. Palin, while I have no previous experience in making stuff up the way Dennis Zaki does, I would consider attempting it, if only I had some of those “sources” like the progressive bloggers do.

But like I said, I haven’t slept since Saturday morning and haven’t showered since Friday night, so I’ll have to wrap this up now. Sources confirm that a shower and some cologne might be especially helpful in further developments, if you get my drift . . .

Recently in the Green Room:



Trackback URL


Sources on another blog I read confirmed that their inside sources second cousin’s brother in law’s mother said that Michelle Obama worked her way through college as a call girl specializing in Japanese businessmen who had a Bride of Godzilla fetish.

Jeff from WI on August 2, 2009 at 7:41 AM

Dennis Zaki is fresh meat for “sources”.

maverick muse on August 2, 2009 at 8:09 AM

Simpsons CABF02

Homer: … Who told you that?

Bart: Nelson.

Homer: Hmmm. That’s the kind of dirt that belongs on my web page.

Lisa: You can’t post that on the Internet. You don’t even know if it’s true!

Homer: Nelson has never steered me wrong, honey. Nelson is gold.

Bart: You know, it might have been Jimbo.

Homer: Beautiful, we have confirmation.

casel21 on August 2, 2009 at 8:26 AM

Funny stuff. You may not be getting more “exclusive” quotes, though….

cs89 on August 2, 2009 at 9:48 AM

Evidence? Cripes, we have reams of evidence that lefties here have Stalin and Pol Pot fetishes, yet that is ignored. Soros has a summer internship with the SS? Down the memory hole.

Oh, and shouldn’t Larry Sinclair count as a source?

PimFortuynsGhost on August 2, 2009 at 10:20 AM

American Power tracked-back with, “Behold the Awesome Power of ‘Sources'”.

Donald Douglas on August 2, 2009 at 11:31 AM

Any more quotes and this post will be NSFW.

(get the rest and email them then)

DaveC on August 2, 2009 at 12:00 PM

Any more quotes and this post will be NSFW. . . .
DaveC on August 2, 2009 at 12:00 PM

Actually, Dave, I got a call this morning from a source who suggested a few minor changes, just to prevent unintended offense to certain persons in Wasilla.

ME: What? What’s wrong with that?
SOURCE: Well, the whole “rutting caribou” paragraph is . . .
ME: A bit too much?
SOURCE: Yeah. Kind of over-the-top.
ME: OK. OK. I gotcha. So what should I change it to?
SOURCE: I don’t know.
ME: “Gettin’ jiggy”? “Making whoopie”? No, no, wait — “the beast with two backs”? Nah, too Shakespearean. I dunno. I’m stumped here . .
SOURCE: Stumped here?
ME: No, that won’t work either.

You see what I’m talking about, Dave? Progressive bloggers never seem to have these conversations with their sources.

The Other McCain on August 2, 2009 at 1:37 PM

Funny stuff. You may not be getting more “exclusive” quotes, though….
cs89 on August 2, 2009 at 9:48 AM

C’mon, Meg. It’s good for the Guv’s image. If conservatives don’t take this over and own it, Tina Fey controls the narrative..

Lighten up, or I might file an ethics complaint.

Oh. Wait. Too late for that.


The Other McCain on August 2, 2009 at 2:02 PM

Know you meant well, but the extended riff on the Palins “going at it” struck me as highly disrespectful and in very poor taste.

CK MacLeod on August 2, 2009 at 5:12 PM

Know you meant well, but the extended riff on the Palins “going at it” struck me as highly disrespectful and in very poor taste.
CK MacLeod on August 2, 2009 at 5:12 PM

Thanks for the feedback, CK. I’m waiting to hear what Sarah thinks of it. One of the rules of humor is that you never find out where the line is until you cross it. (Cf., Michael Richards.)

As a married father of six myself, my wife and I are often confronted with the common joke, “Hey, you know what causes that, right?” To which I’ve learned to respond, “Yes, and we’ve very good at it!”

If you spend your time looking for opportunities to be offended, your diligence will surely be rewarded. Some choose to pretend that we are living in a “Mary Poppins” world, but we’re not.

One reason younger voters have trouble relating to the GOP is the perception that Republicans are “uptight” and “repressed” about sex. Therefore, the Left has a monopoly on the kind of snarky stuff you see on “The Daily Show” and “Colbert Report,” and young people are reinforced in the belief that, not only are conservatives a bunch of neurasthenic wimps with sexual “hangups,” but they also can’t take a joke.

It is not my policy to write up enumerated and bulleted talking-point outlines of my concepts of political strategy and then publish them on the Web, where the Left can examine them and develop counter-strategies. I merely do what I do, and trust that friends who know me will understand my bona fides.

A famous general (Prussian, if memory serves) once said that if his hat knew his plans, he would burn his hat, lest the enemy have a chance to discover how he intended their destruction. It is better to be correct and considered to be mad, than to be considered correct and actually be wrong.

I do not insist that I am always right. However, as I’ve sometimes cautioned people who question my tactics, “Just because you don’t know what I’m doing, don’t assume that I don’t know what I’m doing.”

Given that the standard tactical playbook of the GOP has, in recent years, led from disaster to catastrophe to apocalypse, perhaps we should come up with a new playbook. That’s really all I’m saying.

The Other McCain on August 2, 2009 at 9:22 PM

“Divorce Todd? Have you seen Todd? I may be just a renegade hockey mom, but I’m not blind!”

Darn straight. Todd Palin is a hottie.

mjk on August 2, 2009 at 11:13 PM

One reason younger voters have trouble relating to the GOP is the perception that Republicans are “uptight” and “repressed” about sex.

I had a good giggle over my “liberal” cousin freaking out when she discovered that I’d been to adult book store. And that I’d “done it.” And that I told a highly inappropriate sex joke to her parents. Apparently when you lean conservative, you’re pretty much a nun….

mjk on August 2, 2009 at 11:15 PM

The Other McCain on August 2, 2009 at 9:22 PM

Nothing in your reply changes my reaction to the piece one iota. Being prudish and supporting standards of decency – which are really just standards of mutual respect and civility – are not the same thing. It’s not just demeaning of Sarah Palin, but in my opinion self-demeaning, to write about her in that way.

To whatever extent conservatives have managed to avoid lowering themselves to the level of the left, it’s been a positive, both intrinsically and politically. Aping leftist cultural styles really isn’t that much different from aping leftist politics: The worldview that ignores the dignity of the individual and transcendant values and norms in the cultural sphere is the same one that is happy to ignore those same values in policy-making.

CK MacLeod on August 2, 2009 at 11:59 PM

This post has been promoted to

Comments have been closed on this post but the discussion continues here.

Ed Morrissey on August 3, 2009 at 1:19 AM

CK MacLeod on August 2, 2009 at 11:59 PM

Your criticism is acknowledged and I have no desire, by further dispute, to alienate whatever esteem I might otherwise retain by ceasing to argue.

Perhaps I should explain how an indifference to my own notorious reputation has become habitual. I arrived in Washington in 1997, and in subsequent years various individuals, choosing me as their particular enemy, decided to advance themselves by maligning me. It was therefore as a matter of self-interest — indeed, at times, a matter of professional survival — that I learned to flaunt a disdainful attitude about the reputation these enemies purposefully damaged. It became my custom to jest cheerfully about the harm to my career and the insult my good name, so as never to give these vile two-faced slanderers the satisfaction of thinking they had inflicted any blow worthy of my notice.

Of course, I understand that most other people, having never suffered from such treatment, can never truly empathize with those who have suffered thus. Like Coriolanus, my pride is wounded to be required to display my scars.

Pride is my great flaw, and you will note the irony that one so naturally proud should choose to take pride in an undeserved shame, rather than be obliged to explain or defend himself, when considerations of honor ought to have required that the many who had benefitted from his labors would have leapt unbidden to his defense. Alas, as Burke said, the age of chivalry died long ago, and the man is rightly thought a sentimental fool who expects nowadays to treated with an old-fashioned sense of justice

It was by no desire to reduce the prestige of others, and certainly not to embarrass the Palin family, that the above satire was composed. The object was to lampoon the ridiculous way in which Messrs. “Gryphen” and Zaki resorted to what I call Cargo Cult Journalism, with their alleged “sources” to justify their lies.

Although my intent was innocent — indeed, my personal feelings toward the Palins are entirely those of admiration and affection, as with one’s fellow sufferers — it is evident that my judgment was so inferior that it constituted an offense to “standards of decency,” as you say.

Accepting the superiority of your judgment in such matters, Mr. MacLeod, I have this moment resolved not to risk further offense to Hot Air readers. Therefore, I shall post nothing further at the Green Room without your express prior permission.

Thank you for your courtesy and kindness, sir, and with sincere apology for every previous offense given, it is with the warmest regard that I assure you I remain

Your most humble and obedient servant,


The Other McCain on August 3, 2009 at 1:30 AM

Ed Morrissey on August 3, 2009 at 1:19 AM

Don’t see it there. Also, I’m probably not the first to notice this, but “promotions” seem to have quite a lag from when they are noted on the GreenRoom and when they appear on Hotair.

Not 7+ hours generally, but there it is.

cs89 on August 3, 2009 at 7:38 AM

Your personal history is irrelevant to the criticism I offered, and to me suggests a concession in the form of an excuse. As for explaining your satirical intent, it was obvious, and your justifications are also irrelevant: They might be mitigating, at least in theory, but again they amount to a concession. Your final resort to sarcasm tends to confirm that you hope to deflect or avoid discussion. Again, in attempting to demean someone else – me, in this instance quite intentionally – you demean yourself.

Talking about a family that way is bad manners, and implicitly supports the excesses by the desperate, less restrained, truly licentious comedians of the world, the David Letterman, Sandra Benrhard, and Bill Maher types. It also fixes the focus, yet again, on Palin’s sexuality and image, rather than her politics.

To some extent Palin herself has helped fuel that syndrome, though usually from a much more innocent perspective – as when her statement after the Letterman incident referred to keeping Willow away from him, or in this latest incident when she refers to what a great-looking man Todd Palin is. I don’t fault her greatly for these comments – she’s just a human being and not a pretentious one – but she doesn’t really need to prove that she’s willing to let her hair down. She doesn’t suffer from excessive formality. She needs, over time, to be taken very seriously, or politically she won’t count for much more than a distraction.

Crude burlesque about her sex life, from someone who claims to respect her, doesn’t aid her. It reinforces the case, one that I’m not for now willing to accept, that she cannot ever be taken seriously.

CK MacLeod on August 3, 2009 at 11:07 AM