Image 01 Image 03

Wonkette Goes After Trig Palin Again

Wonkette Goes After Trig Palin Again

It really is hard to understand why some adults feel the need to make fun of Trig Palin, a one-year old who has Down Syndrome. Politics alone cannot explain it. If you don’t like Sarah Palin, fine, but why go after Trig?

The controversy regarding the Photoshop of Trig by Alaskan blogger Linda Biegel is only the tip of the iceberg. Ever since Sarah’s nomination, Trig has been a target. Last fall, the popular DC-based “gossip” website Wonkette joked how Trig must have wished he’d been aborted. Now Wonkette has taken Biegel’s Photoshop antics as an excuse to go after Trig anew.

In a recent post, Wonkette promoted and joked about even cruder Photoshops of Trig at the Something Awful web forum, where people can post anonymously (examples below). Wonkette even included one of these photoshops in its post (above right) while mocking Trig as the “New Jesus,” “Holy Infant” and “Sacred One.”

All the attacks on Trig are Sarah’s fault, according to the Wonkette post, since Sarah had the audacity to bring Trig on stage at the Republican National Convention (where the original photo in question was taken), which Wonkette calls using Trig as a “cheap political prop.” I guess that makes the Obama kids fair game according to Wonkette since they were brought on stage at the Democratic National Convention.

Sarah is to blame for all the new Photoshops of Trig, according to the Wonkette post, because Sarah complained about Biegel:

The Virgin Palin, Our Lady of Eternal Anger, gave birth to the New Jesus at some point last year — or not, who knows, and now Andrew Sullivan just cares about Iran (which is a good thing!) so we’ll never find out the truth — and ever since it has been both a Cardinal/Venial Sin and Sharia Law that no mortal shall “desecrate” an image of the Sacred One … no one but Sarah Palin herself, because Allah both allows and encourages the use of the Holy Infant as a cheap political prop as long as such cruel hackery is performed by the Virgin Palin herself.

Palin’s fury was such, when she found out some blog “on the Internet” had combined a picture of her cradling one of her Magic Babies together with a picture of her Jedi Master, some dingbat old radio talk-show clown in Alaska, that she did verily send her dumbest disciple, “Brother Meg,” to start a Jihad against the Entire Internet.

But we know what happens when a fear-and-anger crazed Snow Witch starts a vain war she can never hope to win: The Internet Strikes Back.

Which is to say, Palin basically poked a stick in the world’s largest beehive filled with cheap & tireless insanity, and the SomethingAwful.com goons have unleashed a pack of Photoshop Dogs From Hell to make the most incredible collection of Sarah Palin Desecration Images in the History of Time, the end.

General Bullshit > Sarah Palin thinks photoshopping special needs babies is appalling [Something Awful]

Here are two of the milder Photoshops in the Something Awful forum which are Sarah’s fault according to Wonkette:


What a riot. It takes small people to stoop this low.

[Note: Accordingly to one of the commenters, the face imposed on the photo immediately above is that of a convicted sex offender, Brian Peppers, which makes that Photoshop particularly sick.]

UPDATE: Huffington Post blogger Jason Linkins has joined Wonkette in blaming Sarah for the crude Photoshops because Sarah complained and used the word “desecrate”:

And now, all of these people that you had heretofore never heard of are famous, because Sarah Palin wouldn’t let the stuff slide. Even dumber, she said that the photoshopping was a “desecration,” which means she believes Trig had been “divested of her sacred character.” Now I think Trig Palin is an awesome kid, but COME ON. That’s a really pretentious thing for a parent to say.

Can’t the Editors at Wonkette or bloggers at HuffPo check the dictionary? Desecrate has more than one meaning, and is not limited to someone being “divested” of “sacred character.” The Mirriam-Webster online dictionary includes “to treat disrespectfully, irreverently, or outrageously” in the definition of the term. Sounds right to me. More important, regardless of which words Sarah used, why does that justify attacks on Trig?

UPDATE No. 2: Check out my post It Always Has Been About Trig.

——————————————–
Related Posts:
“Palin Lied, People Died” And Other Media Fictions
Psst…Don’t Tell Andrew Sullivan Our Secret
Are Anti-Palin Intellectuals Anti-Intelligence?

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.