Take a look at this photo and describe Sarah Palin and her family, in your mind:
And then compare to this:
Palin has a toned-down version of the porn actress look favoured by this decade’s woman, the overtreated hair, puffy lips and permanently alarmed expression. Bristol has what is known in Britain as the look of the teen mum, the “pramface.” Husband Todd looks like a roughneck; Track, heading off to Iraq, appears terrified.
Really? Only question remaining is why Mallick didn’t light into the seven-year-old. Heck, why stop there–must be something insulting she can make up about the baby.
In historical studies, as in journalism actually, they teach you not to trust one eyewitness. This must be why.
________________________
Tanya adds: I must admit, Track did look a little stunned. However, something tells me it may have had more to do with the crowd of thousands cheering for him.








I couldn’t finish reading the article quoted. I am at a loss to understand why a journalist (?) has to resort to such vulgarity and vitriol to make her point. Her point – whatever it was – is lost in the midst of such muck. Why do people hate Sarah Palin (and her family) so much? Is goodness such a bad thing that someone like Sarah Palin has to be raked over the coals?
From her biography – “Heather Mallick has a nice old-fashioned M.A. in English literature”.
There is nothing nice about this piece of “literature” (I use the term loosely). And the only thing “old fashioned” here is Ms Mallick’s attitudes about men (whom she obviously has no use for).
Go figure……Mark Steyn gets sued for promoting hate speech. And this article will probably qualify Ms Mallick for next years’ Order of Canada…..