This again?

Remember back in August '08, when Senator John McCain named then-Governor Sarah Palin to be his running mate, and people who care about these things got warm and fuzzy feelings because the governor could fire guns and reproduce? And then there was this low-key, never-quite-bubbled-to-the-surface rumor that Palin's infant son was really her grandson, and that his mother was actually Palin's oldest daughter, then-17-year-old Bristol? And then the campaign announced that Bristol couldn't have given birth to a baby in April, because now in August she's five months pregnant with her own baby? Good times!


(By the way, I envy whatever copywriter gets to handle this chapter in the eventual Time-Life coffee-table book on the early 21st century.)


Anyway, a professor in Kentucky is bringing up all the Trig-birther BS again as part of an academic article on how the media covers (or doesn't cover) conspiracy theories. Now, if this were an analysis of how the press covered the Trig Palin rumors vs. how other "conspiracy" stories were handled, I think it could be a thought-provoking look at how our media gate-keepers make decisions. Why did the press spend more time parsing that time that First Lady Hillary Clinton fired the White House travel office, or - lest we forget - breathlessly chronicling Donald Trump's opinion of the president's birthplace? See, THAT would be worth understanding.


Instead, the paper is a rehash of the whole story about how Palin went into labor with her youngest son while at a meeting in Texas, flew home and traveled back to the small hospital in her hometown. I'll admit that, the first time I read about her 20-hour trip while in labor with a special-needs baby, it raised my eyebrows. But it's really none of my business, and I wasn't there.


I have to ask, though... Even if we were to grant that everything the conspiracy theorists believe is true - what is the significance? "Biggest hoax in American political history"? Please! The Obama birthers may be nuts who skipped sixth grade civics class, but at least there's some consequence to their conspiracy (Obama's eligibility to be president). If Palin were to call a press conference tomorrow and announce that Trig was actually birthed by her youngest daughter (plot twist!), what would we know about her ability to govern that we don't already know?


In other words, if one were to make a list of all the reasons that Sarah Palin shouldn't be in a position of authority, this would be just about the last item on it. Wasting time "researching" this says a great deal more about the conspiracy theorists than it does about Palin.