The OP is like one of those shadow box optical illusion thingies. If I look at it long enough, it’s Palin’s divorce, but if I blink or look away, it suddenly becomes Palins divorce again.
Slight note for the comparison: the Trig-wasn’t-her-baby (or was the rumor the other way around?) broke when the board was in that eerie place between servers (what was it called?), so with relaxed rules and all there was a bit more vitriol flying than usual.
I also think there is/was a malicious component to the Obama=terrorist/Kenyan/etc. rumors. Not that many Palin rumors aren’t politically motivated, cruel, or eeevil, but (IMHO), they fall more into the “what’s that weirdo Michale Jackson up to now” stories. Er, when he was alive, that is. Not that there weren’t ugly rumors there too (duh), but many of them were of the “OMG, his nose fell off!” ilk.
Considering the high-quality search function here, that would take a few days at best. So to save time, could Bricker provide some links since he obviously remembers it happening?
This is one of the reasons that we opened the board up to outside search engines. If you’d like to do some research, you might want to read this thread for a good overview of how to search the SDMB using Google.
I hate to break up the technical digression, but did we suddenly enter a parallel universe where people are expected to substantiate dubious claims that they don’t agree with? Bricker posed the hypothesis; let him prove it.
If this were GQ or GD, I’d agree with you wholeheartedly. But it’s the Pit. We don’t substantiate dubious claims here. We rant. We insult each other’s heritage, hygiene, parenthood, and genitals. We make broad, sweeping claims about the mental, ethical, and physical shortcomings of other people’s favorite politicians.
In GD, you’d say, “Posterboy’s hypothesis is dubious and lacks proof.”
In the Pit, you’d say, “Posterboy is unintelligent, ugly, offensive, and gets his opinions from reading supermarket tabloids.”