The things pounded home in both Geoffrey Dunn’s book The Lies of Sarah Palin and Frank Bailey’s book Blind Allegiance to Sarah Palin are simple.
1. It’s easier for Sarah to lie than it is to tell the truth.
2. No lie is too outrageous.
3. Her preoccupation with her public image will be her downfall.
[Click image to enlarge]
Over the past few days I have zealously instigated and contributed to an almost forensic examination of Sarah’s claim to being not just a runner – but a runner so amazingly skilled she didn’t need to prepare her body for a hearty race the way other athletes and runners would need to prepare. Sarah (who hasn’t had a recorded, successful run since 2005) had no need for special muscle-building diets or daily training on outdoor courses. She didn’t need a routine of going to bed early during the week before to guarantee she’d be rested and fresh for the September 4 event. She didn’t need a regime of daily exercises and leg stretches to tone her 47 year old muscles and tendons.
And sans all the preparation routinely performed by other runners, Sarah leisurely walked across the finish line, claimed completion of the 13.1 mile race in 1 hour and 46 minutes,(besting, by the way, all the runners – half her age) and snagged herself a second place medal.
Show me all the photographic evidence you like – I will not believe Sarah actually ran 13 consecutive miles at a time of 8 minutes each without stopping or cheating or somehow rorting the system. My gut is with those who say the course was around a lake – the pack broke up and people ran alone – all too easy to run a mile then slip off to the side and not re-enter until an appropriate appearance was called for – and then again towards the end. At best, I would concede she ran half the distance. Maybe. If forced.
No lie is too outrageous.
One month ago Sarah Palin faked a visit to a Kentucky museum. (Correction: Kansas WWI museum.) And she might have gotten away with it except a local newspaper outed her.
Two months ago she faked a family vacation. We know this because her youngest daughter Piper outed her.
Two years ago Sarah claimed the new healthcare proposal presented by the Obama Administration to guarantee no child would ever be denied health insurance due to a pre-existing ailment was based on death panels and people should be afraid. By the time she was called out – too many people already believed her and the new plan was picked apart like vultures had descended on a corpse.
No lie is too outrageous.
I began my post a couple of days back by saying I didn’t give a crap if Sarah ran this race or not. I still don’t. What I do care about is if she didn’t run this race, somebody needs to call her on it.
This is a woman who because of her image alone influences the way some American voters think and feel and spend their money. If her image is bogus – those people deserve to know.
This is a woman who projects herself as a representative of the American people then steps onto foreign soil and tells the world our president is a terrorist with terrorist ties.
And she’s about to take her Obama is a louse circus act to South Korea.
To those who think this photography-sleuthing of the Storm Lake Half Marathon was all just a silly, childish exercise I might remind you that had there been a few more outrageous souls in the Alaska press when Sarah first announced her amazing 2 month pregnancy, there may have been more photographic evidence saved, fewer computers and MySpace accounts scrubbed and more people in the know willing to come forward with the truth. It would have saved us all a horrendous headache.
So from now on no matter how trivial, we seriously need to hold every photo, every speech, every claim made by Sarah up to a light and say hey, does that look right to you? and not be afraid to be wrong . Otherwise we’ll never find the truth.
At the very least, if Sarah didn’t honestly run this race someone was cheated out of a medal they’d earned. Someone’s daughter, mother or wife. It may have been the very key to lifting this person’s level of confidence. It may have been the boost someone needed to jump an emotional hurdle.
Sarah – I hope you won this medal honestly. I do. You’ve just never given me a single reason to believe you.
======================== UPDATE ========================
Ok I know many of you are thinking Crapola woman nOw what! Well you’re not alone. The voices in my head are pretty much on the same rant – (only some of them are off-key and it’s really annoying) but here’s the thing.
See that haloed image above? The one of the first photo presented on foX as living proof Sarah was in the race? Something is still inherently wrong with that photo. In the previous posts we’ve talked about the raised sleeve, the missing word jump (which should have been visible ahead of the number 63) and the floating, pixelated feet. We’ve covered how nobody seems to see her coming, not even the woman she’s apparently about to run into when she trips over the curb she doesn’t seem to see… we’ve solved the issues of the crazy shoes and disposable clothing. But. Something.
So when I went looking for a graphic to post here (because now a post without a graphic just seems – naked) I found myself playing with all my enhancing gadgets and liked the haloed neon effect given above – so there ya go. Graphic selected and post finished.
I grab a sandwich because I haven’t eaten all day, bring it back to my desk and start to close down my graphic program. On closing, one of the images grows really big because I’ve leaned on the enlarge tool by mistake and oh my good gosh look what stares me right in the face!
You guys see the same thing I do?
How does a woman at least two feet behind and three feet to the left manage to get her foot OVER the image of Sarah’s bum? The pair of running pants Sarah is wearing are clearly, heavily outlined all the way around her legs and torso – but not so at the point of this woman’s shoe.
I removed the neon and enhanced it again, this time using the lead pencil tool. This does not distort an image. It makes objects sharper but does not change their shape or position in a photo. Look:
(This one you’ll need to click to enlarge)
That has got to be a sign it was photoshopped no? The runner number cloth is also now clearly cut into the bottom of the sleeve (as one commenter mentioned) and over the bottom hem in front of the red shirt that I mentioned and umm got scolded at for (pfft! Like I’ve never been scolded before…)
I just can’t seem to lose the word bogus when I look at these photos. And honestly, I really don’t mind being wrong about something – I just really hate feeling like someone’s out there thinking I’m so stupid they could pull this kind of shill and I wouldn’t notice.
Ok I’m ready… let the bashing begin!
September 7, 2011 at 4:04 pm
Agreed! Great post.
September 7, 2011 at 4:13 pm
Perfect. You make sense of it all. Plus…the first picture, and some of the others, I really believe are not her. She is pitiful.
September 7, 2011 at 9:26 pm
The picture warrants study. Something was odd about it and you got it! Great work, and thanks for being diligent!
September 7, 2011 at 9:35 pm
Tyvek running number bibs are fastened via pins placed into holes near the four corners. There is actually quite a bit of free play in them depending on the size of the pins and where you place the pins. Thus you could fave a situation where the front top of the bib could cover part of a shirt or part of an arm.
September 7, 2011 at 9:52 pm
If the Tundra Turd hadn’t given herself such a “fabulous” time, she might have gotten away with the scam. However, in typical DumbShit fashion, she had to be “exceptional.”
September 7, 2011 at 9:56 pm
I feel sorry for the woman who actually deserves the medal …
Good sleuthing, OzMud! Now… can you somehow get your post into the MSM (or, in the case of Palin, LSM)?
September 7, 2011 at 10:30 pm
I’ll say it again, I just love this blog. You rock!
Sarah is a fake and a loser.
September 7, 2011 at 10:34 pm
I believe that $arah did something fishy at this event, but that woman’s shoe is not on top of $arah’s pants. What you see is an illusion caused by $arah’s “saddle bags.” The top of her thighs swish out farther than her butt. You can see it clearly in the photo of her walking over the finish line checking her watch. The image of her in the running photo has been doctored. There’s a clear rough edge around her body. She was either placed there or just a bad attempt to enhance her to stand out from the crowd.
September 7, 2011 at 10:39 pm
Ozmud, I’d be cautious reaching any definitive conclusions about the running photo. I’m not saying there aren’t plenty of strange things about it. But an 800×600 pixel image that has obviously been greatly compressed does not yield much detail. All the edges are jagged and have what are referred to as compression artifacts, the blurry loss of detail seen especially around the edges of things.
Another thing that happens in digital photographs is a tendency for bright objects to bleed into the edge of a darker object. I’ve had to fix such optical distortions in Photoshop any number of times. Usually I’m working on a high resolution file that provides plenty of detail and lots of pixels. In the Palin image we’re looking at a lot of pixellated mush.
That said, this is one weird looking image. On another blog, I think IM, I made the observation that the runners in front appear to be in full stride only a few feet in front of walkers who are barely moving. I would expect runners at full stride to need more room to reach that position. Which leads me to suspect there are two images–one of the runners, and one of the walkers–joined together with SP laid in on top. I’d look for a seam between the pink hair band figure and the black hooded figure. That would be a difficult area to mesh together.
But in my “expert” opinion, there isn’t enough digital information to go on. We need more pictures. Is it really possible that SP ran 13 miles and this is the only photo available other than the finish and post race?
September 7, 2011 at 10:40 pm
Lol. The woman is a true narcissistic sociopath, no doubt about it! She couldn’t bear to just fake an okay time, no no, she had to be AMAZING and cause the bots heads to spin in awe. They truly believe all the things she fakes and just believe she manages it because she’s a super woman! Sarah can lose baby weight in her forties within a few days, Sarah can divine when and where she will give birth in the future, Sarah can not train but run amazing marathons other mere mortals have to train for months for AND she can do it looking pretty and barely breaking a sweat! Sarah is such an amazing woman that her down syndrome suffering child with heart problems will be fine when trotted out to her workplace a few days after birth! Sarah can run a presidential campaign with NO traditional set ups in key primary states like lawyers and teams of staff and fundraisers! Sarah can win 8 years in the White House without needing anyone else to help her, she will just show up and people will vote for what’s best for the country I.e. Her! Sarah doesn’t need to KNOW things to win the presidency! She’s a super woman, she can just DO it without even trying! Sarah has the perfect marriage and perfect family and perfect figure and face and blah blah blah blah.
It makes me SICK
September 7, 2011 at 10:45 pm
“Tyvek running number bibs are fastened via pins placed into holes near the four corners. There is actually quite a bit of free play in them depending on the size of the pins and where you place the pins. Thus you could fave a situation where the front top of the bib could cover part of a shirt or part of an arm.”
I have 50+ bib numbers saved from events in which I ran and I can’t imagine the above happening to the extent observed in the photo.
Cheers.
Headset
September 7, 2011 at 10:46 pm
So, can you enlarge the original at the runner’s hands and figure out what she’s holding? It looks to me like a race number. I do agree that, like all things Palin, this one is fishy.
September 7, 2011 at 11:15 pm
From a runner’s perspective: I’m female, a few years older than Sarah, and have been running & racing since 1986 — total of 189 races from 2 miles to 100 miles. I’ve run 19 half-marathons, most in the 1:40-2:00 range. My thoughts:
1) It’s not easy to run 13.1 eight-minute miles. I can only do it when I’ve been training properly…you need long runs and some tempo runs. (And it seems convenient that 1:46 equates to exactly 8-min. miles?)
2) Real runners (in a road race) don’t run across the grass like that…too easy to twist an ankle on the cement around the manhole cover and/or the curb. (And she’s not even looking down as she approaches the curb.)
3) Palin’s right in front of the walkers? Typically, you don’t run 8-minute miles right in front of the walkers.
4) There’s no one else near her when she’s finishing? Usually there would be a lot of male runners finishing with a time in that range.
5) What’s with the sweaty neckline and shoulders? That’s a sweat pattern I don’t usually see. Especially on a cool day.
Conclusion, IMHO: unless Palin’s been doing a lot of undocumented training (which seems unlikely, given the media coverage of her), there’s no way she truly ran a 1:46 half-marathon.
September 7, 2011 at 11:59 pm
Yeah, and that guy’s shirt above her elbow also cuts off her sleeve in a weird way.
I just wish they would admit the fakery with the photo. It’s all so juvenile. Shame that the race got pulled into her pathology. I hope someone talks. They can’t possibly pay off 200+ people.
September 8, 2011 at 12:03 am
Sorry if these questions have already been answered. Where did the photo come from? Who took the photo? How did Greta get the picture? Thanks.
September 8, 2011 at 12:03 am
Would someone mind providing link or more info on Palin faking a visit to a Kentucky museum a month ago and getting called out by a local paper? I missed that when it happened and would like to read about it. Thank you!
September 8, 2011 at 12:04 am
sorry, that woman’s shirt. Also, too, I always thought the botton of the gray shirt with the number appeared photoshopped on. The bottom line is far too crisp for a real shirt. Same with the bottom line of the woman’s shirt that impinges on the back of Palin’s arm. Someone went through a lot of trouble to paste that gray shirt on Palin’s abdomen. They were a little too neat with the edges, though.
September 8, 2011 at 12:06 am
DAMN, I wish there was an edit button!!
” i always thought the BOTTOM of the gray”…..
September 8, 2011 at 12:08 am
Notice two other things. The bottom edge of her grey shirt. The part below the runner number is shifted up, doesn’t match the edge, and it seems to be a perfectly rectangular cutout. Also, look between her legs – there is somebody’s shoe to the left of the shoe of the woman just behind to the right of Palin – who does it belong to? It seems to be too far ahead of the woman behind and to the left.
September 8, 2011 at 12:10 am
Fake, fake, fake. Floaty feet, too big, much, much larger image than petite 5’3″ Palin.
Gryphen posted a shot of her twice in the same picture. The smaller Sarah figure in front looks like it fits into the shot, but even it is wrong somehow as she didn’t have concrete in back for that stride.
That really made me think not only odd but photoshopped. She isn’t looking down and damnit she would trip and fall flat on her face on that curb that is in her way.
Also how clear she is in relation to other mere mortals in that shot..
The woman never does anything straight, honest or fair. She cheated someone else out of medal because Sarah Heath wants to win. They say she ran under her maiden name to be inconspicuous? Bull.
September 8, 2011 at 12:34 am
Sally:
I think that is the bib from the runner behind Sarah.
September 8, 2011 at 12:50 am
When posting about the block being cut into the sleeve, I still find it odd too to see the upper part of the sleeve rise up above the area where the number block is at the bottom. It’s almost like they spliced the arm and moved it up creating the rise above the block but also the rise on the upper arm, then filed in the areas at the corners.
September 8, 2011 at 12:51 am
Oh my, WELL DONE, Ozmud; very well done indeed.
And I second everyone who pointed out that cheating and fakery are Standard Operating Procedure for Mrs. Palin, and lying–even when there is no conceivable reason for lying–is not even second-nature: it’s her first instinct, always. (I reviewed Game Change when it first came out. All I can say is, good grief, when someone’s lies are so baldfaced and outrageous they shock a seasoned political operative like Schmidt, you can safely assume that we have stumbled into uncharted territory and discovered a brand new species of sociopath. Mendacitus pantsaflame, var. “Palin”
September 8, 2011 at 12:55 am
I think maybe the color of Palin’s clothes etc was boosted to make her stand out more. Otherwise, I think the picture is legit.
September 8, 2011 at 12:56 am
Ugh I need to get back to work but am just intrigued by the Kentucky Museum reference and can’t find any mention of it by googling. Can anybody help?
September 8, 2011 at 12:58 am
The most questionable thing to me is that not one person in the walking crowd looked over at her as she sped by, wearing red no less. I can understand that anyone running would put themselves in peril if they lost focus but the walkers???? Her number is much darker and sharper than the others despite them being just ‘inches’ away. This has to be some sort of ruse she cooked up to get folks talking about her (again) so she could use any criticism of her ‘love for running’ to further fatten her victim scrapbook.
September 8, 2011 at 1:05 am
Would someone mind providing link or more info on Palin faking a visit to a Kentucky museum a month ago and getting called out by a local paper?
I believe it was actually a Kansas museum – the National World War I Museum in Kansas City.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61773.html
September 8, 2011 at 1:05 am
What strikes me as peculiar about the first picture of Sarah floating above the grass is that she must have also floated over that large, concrete structure embedded in the ground right behind her. It is right in the path of her trajectory; surely she would have had to pause to maintain her balance, assuming she did not trip. Yet she appears unflustered, full speed ahead.
Also,, the pictures which have appeared of “Sarah” posing with various young people after the race are certainly false, as that “Sarah” is about 20 years younger that our Sarah and although she might pass as a ringer, she shows no evidence that she just ran 13 miles before she stopped to a picture with her fans.
September 8, 2011 at 1:08 am
Half a race, half a term, I see they are saying it over and over on the thread about this race at Huffington. I never comment, but I glance at the comments now and then.
This hangs around her neck now like a chicken the dog catches, which is hung around its neck until it rots off, that is if the killer dog isn’t put down.
It is still a matter of do you think she actually ran an honest race or is this her usual fakery. My take is someone at Faux probably helped her.
It was Greta, her dearest of dear goombahs, who used this particular photo
Or was it someone else..
September 8, 2011 at 1:10 am
Actually she faked the run in ’05 too. A few years ago when I was looking into the “Humpy’s” race in Anchorage she supposedly ran, I noticed something very interesting in the results. A very good friend of mine (who has been running marathons for years and spends a tremendous amount of time training) was listed as having finished one spot ahead of her. So I called her up and asked her if she knew that she had finished just ahead of Sarah Palin and her response to me was just laughter. She said that Sarah was never in that race.
Sarah has some weird obsession with making people think she is a runner. When she came here to Valdez in ’07 to announce what that years PFD was going to be, Sarah stepped off the plane with spandex and running shoes on. Her handlers kept insisting that she wanted to go running with our HS cross county team but it was only 10am and the kids were in school. Her handlers kept berating the Mayor until he finally called the school and managed to get most of the team excused from 8th period so she could go “running” with them. They all met out on the track, Sarah posed for a few pictures with them and then left. She didn’t lift a shoe and after making everyone jump through hoops for her, it ended up being nothing more than another photo op. She’s a complete and total fraud
September 8, 2011 at 1:25 am
Great Job, OZ! And the comments are great as well. I seriously doubt she put any effort in preparation for this “impromptu ingonito event” where SOMEONE just “happened” to snap this photo, and to back it up, a true believer just happened to show up at the end of the race to memorialize that “Sarah Palin, did, indeed show up at the end of the race, and POSED for photos.
It’s all too “perfect”, Even if she trained on a treadmill, there’s no way, no how, she could make that time. I’m an amateur runner, and it takes me weeks if not months to condition. Running on grass is a huge no-no, there’s pits and rocks and the ground generally slows you down.
I have run on sand by the beach for training purposes, but never on grass. That, alone, tells me she faked it. Can’t wait for someone there to speak up!
September 8, 2011 at 1:26 am
I think the grey collar may have been photoshopped in as well. Whoever was mucking around with the photo probably added it to prove it was the same tshirt that she had on at the end of the race. Problem was they overdid it and it doesn’t look natural.
The original photo was probably Palin in the red top and they have cropped the top to add the grey tshirt and number. If you enlarge the photo in PS you can see a straight dark line where the red top ends. It is also visible around the number.
In any event, the shadows prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she didn’t finish when she said she did.
September 8, 2011 at 1:28 am
Link to Kansas City Star reporting on Palin’s supposed visit to the War Museum
http://www.kansascity.com/2011/08/19/3087587/a-silent-sojourn-by-palin-puzzles.html
September 8, 2011 at 1:35 am
I think she entered the race so she could say to her bots that she was “running” and Greta is floating that “joke” for her.
Regarding her “finish line” picture; why is there only one other person in the picture with her? 1:46 is not so superhumanly great that other people couldn’t be pretty close to that mark. Where is her team? Where are the other runners? Where is the crowd waiting for their friends?
How insulting that this woman thinks she can lie and cheat and get away with it every time.
September 8, 2011 at 1:36 am
Ah, Kansas City! Thank you so much!
September 8, 2011 at 1:47 am
no bashing here! And you’re so right — if her ego hadn’t compelled her to list a winning time, her fake wouldn’t be garnering this kind of attention.
September 8, 2011 at 1:48 am
MissSunshine Says: “How insulting that this woman thinks she can lie and cheat and get away with it every time.”
Yes, it is insulting to our intelligence – but, so far, it also is the reality! Until and unless the so-called MSM gets off their collective duffs and expose her for what she is, she will go merrily her grifting ways.
The MSM will not do anything about this, because she is still bringing in $$$ for them when they talk about her.
We have to somehow turn the tide around and make sure that it means MORE $$$ for them, when they expose her true colors. Maybe that day is coming.
Don’t give up hope YET!
September 8, 2011 at 1:49 am
The museum is in Kansas City, not Kentucky.
September 8, 2011 at 1:58 am
I know absolutely nothing about running, or marathons in general, but would it be typical for someone to need to fly up the side of the pack like that, going up on the grass and sidewalk to get around other runners? Isn’t that sort of thing gradual, with the runner moving naturally up and through the pack itself? Or was this supposed to be at the beginning of the race and she missed being on the front end at the start, so she was catching up? Why would she be by these folks who are mostly going quite a bit slower if she felt she’d want a faster pace, anyway? And if they are all just getting started, with some walking and then some breaking into a run, wouldn’t it be considered rude that she is basically just cutting to the front, from the side, because she plans to make better time? All very weird. I don’t know the protocol. I suppose it varies from race to race, particularly depending on the features of the route.
September 8, 2011 at 2:00 am
The shoe on her butt is a great find! I have been staring at the race picture and I cannot match two legs to each runner in front of Sarah. Some of them have a forward leg, but their other legs are missing in the tangle. It’s easy to follow in the picture with the halo effect, because the legs are outlined and stand apart from other things in the background. Same for the blue line drawing.
My guess is that Sarah might have posed for some running pictures, and one was superimposed on a a spliced combination photo which grouped runners and walkers together. Let’s think about it for a moment. The people who are walking would not be directly behind people running. Once those people in front start running, in two seconds, they are ahead, way ahead of the walking people. Start of the race? Why is Sarah coming in from the sidelines?
The white markings on one of Sarah’s legs appears on the other leg in the finish line photo. The running photo was probably flipped (reversed) so that Sarah could run with the crowd. With so many of her fans in Iowa, not one has submitted a picture that they snapped from the sidelines of Sarah streaking by in her bright red, I can’t miss it shirt. Not one person walking or running noticed the Celebrity among them. As for the finish line photo, aren’t there any people who finished right behind Sarah at the same moment? Even if she was second in her group, where are numbers three and four? People for other age groups? I also like the fact that the shadows in Sarah’s finish line photo are much longer than the one used for comparison. It was taken later, much later.
Thanks for the great detective work.
September 8, 2011 at 2:11 am
Whether she actually ran the race or not, what is truly pathetic is that the woman has lied so much about so many things, that no matter what she says she does, most of us automatically assume the opposite is true. She is simply not a reliable source of information about anything, including her own activities. We have watched her look right into the camera and tell a bald-faced lie, over & over. She is not a truthful person.
Also, too, in the above picture she has on a sweat band and a visor & her hair is in a very messy pony tail on top of her head. The posed shots at the end of the race, with the blonde women show her with poufy bangs. How did she smush her hair down with a visor and sweat band, then 13.1 miles later have poufy bangs? Did she find time to blow dry before those photos?
Also, too, her running clothes don’t seem to fit her. There is an end-of-race picture that shows her running tights creased into her bikini line. If she ran 13.1 miles like that, she would be so chafed she couldn’t walk for a week.
September 8, 2011 at 2:25 am
Why are all the other runners on the pavement, but SP is not in the pack? Not a runner, so maybe this happens all the time, but it’s an oddity in this photo that catches my eye.
September 8, 2011 at 2:41 am
mollie,
I’m not 100% sure, but the post should maybe have said that she faked a visit to a Kansas City museum. She faked a visit to the World War One museum in KC, and a local, Republican reporter, Steve Kraske called her out. He writes for the Kansas City Star newspaper, and probably has a blog.
September 8, 2011 at 2:43 am
I love AKshutterbug, #30 Alaskan stories about her op photo faked running with the high school, and her fakery for the race she supposedly ran in Alaska. years ago.
Fits right in with the faked run when she changed from her strappy red shoes into running shoes, ran a little then got into a SUV.
Plus the Thanksgiving Turkey Trot nonsense.
The woman has been doing this all her life. Why would anyone expect her to run an actual and honest race.
If she did we sure will hear about it. Evidently this is an honor system type race? No money or prizes involved? If you want to cut in and pretend? Well no biggie. A fun race for all.
But calling her half time Sarah is a exageration of her abilities in anything.
About the only thing she doesn’t do half time is figuring out how to get money out of her following.
September 8, 2011 at 3:21 am
Too bad the State Department (or whichever governmental agency is in charge of passports) can’t invalidate her passport so that she cannot go to South Korea and make seditious remarks against our President. She is truly the worst of the Ugly Americans abroad.
September 8, 2011 at 3:23 am
Look at the right-bottom of Palin’s back shoe, by her toe: looks like a square cut-and-paste happened there, and they forgot to erase the lower-right corner. Too many pixels in that little triangle compared to the grass around it.
Ditto the front shoe — too little erasing of the original around the shoe so there is a halo of too many pixels, esp compared to the street background and other runners’ feet.
The pink headband runner seems to have her foot cut off, another commenter said. The same one who noted that this was where the photo may have been spliced (runners in front, walkers in rear).
Thanks for doing this, OzMud. Re double standard for Palin vs Obama: if Obama fakes a pregnancy and hoaxes us, I will be after him with equal energy, interest, and revulsion.
September 8, 2011 at 3:37 am
Right here:
http://i52.tinypic.com/o8t121.jpg
September 8, 2011 at 3:38 am
Kinda makes you wonder why none of these people were visible anywhere near Palin, doesn’t it?
3 Caviness, Nathan M31 Carroll, IA 1:42:34.66 2
4 Cole, Chris M37 Storm Lake, IA 1:42:52.77
2 Loehr, Ashley W26 Unattached 1:42:46.35 2
1 Collen, Steve M60 Sheldon, IA 1:43:51.03
2 Lockwood, Doug M55 Unattached 1:44:14.49 1
1 Marks, Julie W46 Des Moines, IA 1:45:05.83 1
((2 Heath, Sarah W47 Des Moines, IA 1:46:10.50 2))
2 Borst, Cathlen W39 Carroll, IA 1:46:55.36
5 Hoyt, Jeremiah M32 Carroll, IA 1:50:03.80
September 8, 2011 at 4:18 am
Julie Marks, Palin’s running partner, was the marker. Find Julie, jump in after her, not too close, about a minute behind her. Make it look good. There it is.
Julie 1:45:05.83
Quitter 1:46:10.50
Phtoshopped, staged doesn’t matter. The photo was a phony. Palin was not running next to those people as she appears to be in that photo. Use any verb that you want. The photo is phony.
September 8, 2011 at 4:25 am
What I don’t get about this photo is that the runners are all in front, obviously grouped together, with the walkers, generally older people wearing long sleeves, in the back. So they must have all started that way, right? Yet the picture is posed so that it looks as if Sarah is running around the slower walkers and cutting in to be with the runners. But if so, why would she have been in the back BEHIND the walkers rather than starting up front with the serious runners in the first place? Was she late or something? Accidentally? Deliberately? Easy to put on a spurt and pass everyone when they’re pacing themselves to run 13 miles and you know you only need to run around the corner.
Plus, it looks as if there’s a side street there where she could have joined the pack. So why cut in at a trajectory that took her over the manhole and has her about to trip over the curb?
Some experts are saying it’s obviously tinkered with; others are saying, no. Whatever. It’s just ridiculous. She might have been there at the beginning; she was definitely there at the end, hair dry and eyeliner in place. The one thing I do know is that she didn’t run the distance in between.
And thanks, akshutterbug, for the confirmation of what I’ve always suspected, that she didn’t really get that great time in 2005, either. I wish that could be made known.
September 8, 2011 at 4:54 am
It just occurred to me why Sarah is WALKING over the finish line rather than running. If the photos were taken at a different time, she would have attracted attention if she ran; but who would notice if she simply walked?
Of course, this would require the organizers (and the other people who posed in their jackets while sweaty Sarah stood there in her T-shirt) to be in on the sham. But we know Sarah constantly gets her bots to do unethical things, so it’s not that far of a stretch.
September 8, 2011 at 4:57 am
Why is Sarah walking across the finish line in a half marathon? It makes no sense with someone only 45secs behind her. Also, too has anyone compared the mens times… why sarah is the only ‘Runner’ in the photo?
September 8, 2011 at 5:28 am
No bashing from me. Keep at it Oz. You are coming up with some great stuff.
September 8, 2011 at 5:31 am
Great post, Ozmud. You made me care about this photo when I thought I had had enough.
September 8, 2011 at 5:32 am
ROFL @ Amy if Pres. Obama successfully fakes a pregnancy I would be so proud! And btw thanks for the shoe stuff –
@sewnut – Thanks! Fixed it!
@Sally – from front to back it is Sarah’s running bib with her left hand extended over the top – the left hand of the runner next to her at her side, her runners bib, her right hand over the top – that runner’s hands are appropriate for someone who is running and hands are close to the body, moving back and forth with the strides.
@Brad & Brian – I find the missing bit of Sarah’s buttocks to allow for the shoe behind her to show through still a bit sus. Especially because nowhere else do her legs fade or blur in the outlining of them. To my eye this is a place where someone has – in editing, mistakenly followed the outline of the back shoe instead of the foreground leg. That said – lord knows I’m not always correct and my eyes do play tricks one – thanks for your input.
@ everyone – thanks so much for the continued discussion – have to work to pay the bills today but I’ll have more tomorrow. You guys have given me a ‘scathingly bodacious idea’ to work on:)
September 8, 2011 at 5:36 am
OZ
I see another odd thing in the running photo (maybe this has been mentioned before and I missed it). Right between Sarah’s legs you can see the left foot of the woman in black. But look carefully at the foot, there is something (another white running shoe perhaps) right behind the woman’s foot. I can’t believe it is the foot of the walking women in white as leg position would have to be very strange and her leg very long. Another thing to make one go Hmmmmm.
Regarding the mixture of the walkers and runners. Typically the runners start at a different time than the walkers, so they would not be in the same shot. Also, even if they did start at the same time there have to be a lot of runners in front of the ones we see. The very first people start running, the rest of the runners generally have to walk a bit until they can start running, it is just too crowded for all the runners start running in full stride at the same instant. (Since your time does not start until you cross the start line and your chip registers, I would assume the start line is suppose to be off to the right in this shot.) It looks like in this shot, all the runners are in full stride running and all the walkers are walking and yet there is no gap between the walkers and runners. Hmmmmm again. I suspect that two photos were taken near the start line, one of the runners starting (they are pretty bunched up) and at the same point and angle the walkers starting, they are also pretty bunched up, and then they stuck the two photos together.
September 8, 2011 at 6:12 am
I’d like to know why she is the only one on the grass. Is that even allowed? Is she cheating by running around all of these people? I don’t get why she is the ONLY one on the grass. That is what makes me think this is a fake, that and the fact that every thing else she does is fact and for illusion.
September 8, 2011 at 6:13 am
Sorry, I meant FAKE and for illusion, certainly not fact.
September 8, 2011 at 6:19 am
I don’t know who, or what the final straw will be that will take her down, but you deserve a pat on the back for trying and spending time on this.
None of us is paid, or wants praise because it is always a team effort, but some do go that extra mile. Oz Mudflats is one of those that make that extra effort.
Well done, well done.
September 8, 2011 at 6:56 am
Please look at the lead runner with the red bandana. To his right, there is someone in a black shirt. We can see one of black shirt’s legs. The foot is planted squarely on the ground. We can see that his other leg is bent, but it has no foot. All of the runners in the same position, with a bent leg, have a foot pointing down. Black shirt lost his foot or his shoe fell off. Or, it was cut off by accident in making this picture.
September 8, 2011 at 7:06 am
My guess is that if SP did anything at all – she ran the 5 mile walker that the old people did. She ran 5 miles in 1 hour and 46 minutes which is extremely slow. Most people can WALK a mile in 15 minutes.
September 8, 2011 at 7:12 am
Just for the record, she didn’t run the 2 person relay event. The results for that are here: http://www.stormlakerunningclub.com/SLhalf-marathonrelay2011.pdf
September 8, 2011 at 7:29 am
Photos from the race are now up on the race site. I dont see Sarah. Do you?
http://www.dotphoto.com/go.asp?l=slrc&AID=6224132
September 8, 2011 at 7:36 am
My bad… the photos are from 2010.
September 8, 2011 at 7:37 am
fig,
I think those are the 2010 photos, not 2011.
September 8, 2011 at 8:18 am
Aww heck fig – she probably had herself photoshopped in those too also
September 8, 2011 at 8:58 am
@ozmud
Nice work. Oz, I don’t make out a left arm or hand of Palin’s at all. Above, you indicated a left hand. Even on the original photo you can see that the foot of the woman behind Palin is making a slight dent into Palin’s butt. Not possible as Palin’s ample butt should block that shoe from view. Great pickup.
I agree with those who have noticed no separation between the runners and walkers. It looks as if each group was placed there and Palin pasted in front of them.
Don’t let the naysayers thwart you. They’re going after the big game (Paxson, McCain, CNP et al). Palin would take a huge hit if it were proven she took credit for completing this race and accepting a 2nd place medal to boot. Big hit. Good work, young lady.
September 8, 2011 at 12:29 pm
A few more things I noticed:
–left photo: I’m bothered by that 1-pixel wide white stripe on the inner side of her back leg. As if the original background was white.
–middle photo: the sunglasses of the woman whose head is right behind Palin look okay at normal size, but the sunglasses look odd enlarged.
–right photo: this looks like me, erasing the background of a copied top layer, my eraser tool a circle, raking little bites out of it, leaving some of the more highly pixeled stuff behind.
http://i55.tinypic.com/13z9vz4.jpg
September 8, 2011 at 1:40 pm
@everyone asking about the hands:
There are three hands – one belongs to the runner in red – two belong to the runner slightly behind and to the left of her.
There is no sight of a left arm or hand for the red runner – which is a bit odd but not impossible. The other two hands appear to be consistent with a small woman who is running with her arms close to her waist but still in motion.
The sunglasses do look wonky as soon as you start enlarging – I’d like to check them against other photos of people in sunglasses at the same angle. Maybe that’s just the way they enlarge?
The seam above the pink headband disappears when you enhance vertical lines rather than becoming more pronounced. I have no idea what that means but it’s weird.
The line of white pixelson the red runner’s pants look exqactly like the pixels which would be left behind so as not to mess with the integrity of the surrounding pixels – but there’s a simalar (albeit not as bright) line of pixels on the black shorts of a male runner just ahead. So again – not sure – but worth a second look eh?
the extra toe on the inside of the red runner’s legs looks like just that – the toe of a second white tennis shoe. (oops did that give away my age? haha) I’m dealing with that tomorrow.
And dust off your calculators pixrel-sleuthers we have some interesting math to do
September 8, 2011 at 2:39 pm
I’m repeating the comment of “senikau” on Laura Novak’s blog. I can’t install this because I have a mac. Worth a try IMO.
++++++++++++++++
Technical Proof that the photo was edited. I found this program JPEGsnoop that tells you the results of whether a picture has been altered or not. It’s very technical and the result is at the end. The result I was given after it scanned Scarah’s photo where she seems to float.
Based on the analysis of compression characteristics and EXIF metadata:
ASSESSMENT: Class 1 – Image is processed/edited
Try it for yourself if you like.
http://impulseadventure.com/photo/jpeg-snoop.html
BIG FAIL Sarah. FAKE just like everything else about you.
+++++++++++++++
September 8, 2011 at 2:46 pm
@Peggy J. Pierce – A comment you made on 05 Sept in the post Hey Joe! If blogging… was caught in the spam filter and I just today found it. Your address to joe was spot on and I’ve cleared it from the filter and it’s now comment #15 on that post. I hope readers here will take the time to read it as you made some wonderful statements to Joe.
@Michael with the trash mouth – Have edited and responded to your comment and it’s comment #38 in yesterday’s post. I mention this here because I do want people to know that I don’t just delete comments I don’t agree with – clean them up yes, but delete them, no.
September 8, 2011 at 5:32 pm
I agree with Brian that what you are seeing in your “neon” experiment are just artifacts of the process (kind of “interference patterns”) and of the low resolution.
I know that everyone is all hepped up and wants to believe that this photo is fake…
You’re seeing what you want to see.
But here’s a thought experiment: Let’s say someone DID paste a picture of Sarah on top of the other runners. IF SO, why would they go out of their way to make a cut-out for the woman’s foot, so as to make it visually overlap? Was it just a complete coincidence that, while outlining Sarah, they left a chunk out of her thigh that just magically happened to coincided with the other lady’s foot?
As with all the claims about these photos, walk them back and they really don’t make sense.
It makes a lot more sense that 1.) Sarah was there; 2.) the photos are real; 3.) she dumped water on her shoulders to poorly mimic sweat; 4.) she posed for an utterly unconvincing staged “finish line” photo. There’s no reason to fake a photo if she was actually there!!!
I hate to see people going down the rat-hole that they did with the Gusty photos.
September 8, 2011 at 6:03 pm
More on the “neon” shot… I haven’t read all the comments yet, so maybe someone else has pointed this out, but … why would the race number be overlapping Sarah’s arm?? That’s obviously not something in the original photo. The “neon” process has enlarged the boundaries of light-colored things (the woman’s sneaker) and shrunk the boundaries of dark-colored things (Sarah’s pants and jacket). Beyond being merely unhelpful, the process is actually introducing defects to the image.
As to your list of things in the comments (sunglasses, headband…), EVERYthing is going to look wonky if you blow it up and stare at it long enough.
Haven’t you ever had the experience of repeating a word so often that it starts to sound impossibly foreign, like it “can’t be” a real word?
————-
I’ll repeat what I’ve said elsewhere, which is that—in my opinion—it would be essentially impossible to photograph a running Sarah in those light conditions and then plug her into one or more existing photos. Even in the very same geographical location, one-half-hour more or less would change the light quality completely. See how her hair, though, has the identical soft-focus and glow as all the other participants, due to the hazy, overcast conditions?
Yes, the pictures of a duplicated Sarah are funny, but they’re “convincing” exactly for the reason I stated above. It’s relatively easy to move things around within the same photo, because things in the same photo were captured under the same lighting conditions.
The reason Sarah is in focus and the others aren’t is because most photo cameras are cheap and have a fixed 2.8 aperture which imposes a shallow depth-of-field.
The reason her jacket is so saturated is, again, just an artifact of the digital camera. I’ve seen many camera-phone shots where particular colors become impossibly bright.
The reason there’s no shadow under Sarah is that there’s no shadow under anyone, except where their feet are actually touching the ground. It was obviously a rather hazy morning.
If, even just using your fingers, you measure from Sarah’s back foot to her shoulder, and line that measurement up to the big guy on the right, Sarah’s shoulder comes up to the middle of the guy’s chest, which seems about right to me—I’m 5’4″ and dated a big guy like that (6’4″). And that’s not even counting the difference in distance from the camera… The fact that she looks larger is just because she’s in the foreground, and the lady behind her is either very short, hunched over, or both (the lady’s shoulder seems almost on a level with the elbow of the guy in the striped shorts).
September 8, 2011 at 11:50 pm
P.S. I’m not writing here to “bash”. I agree wholeheartedly with your general assessment of Mrs. Palin’s antics, neatly summed up in your outline:
1. It’s easier for Sarah to lie than it is to tell the truth.
2. No lie is too outrageous.
3. Her preoccupation with her public image will be her downfall.
I think that the same kind of righteous anger you express when you say “I just can’t seem to lose the word bogus when I look at these photos… I just really hate feeling like someone’s out there thinking I’m so stupid they could pull this kind of shill and I wouldn’t notice.” is leading a LOT of us to want to “do something”. One thing we can “do” sitting at our computers is futz around with photos, so it satisfies that need that we all have to try and unmask Palin… We don’t have many tools, but we have the Photoshop “hammer” to apply to these “nails”. It’s just my opinion that in the case of the photos here, as with the Gusty photos, the general photoshop scramble has been energy mis-directed.
I think most of us who look at Sarah doing ANYthing have an alarm going off that says “bogus”. Many had that alarm go off the first time we heard or saw her. But to a lot of people, she’s just “some lady”.
One of the criticisms of the first race photo was that people weren’t looking at her as she ran past. Well, why would you? She’s just some dame with sunglasses and a geeky visor… These Iowa people weren’t looking for Sarah Palin, so of course they didn’t “see” her. She’s often, as in this case, quite non-descript. Whereas we see (aah-OO-gah! aah-OO-gah!) SARAH PALIN so of course we recognize the Skinny Raven T-shirt and the running pants from Runner’s World and on and on. They are the ones living in blissful ignorance.
)
Anyway, I’ve been on several of the anti-Palin blogs trying to “talk people down” from this Photoshop frenzy, so I hope you don’t take my comments to be a personal affront in any way. Best regards, -Lidia17
September 8, 2011 at 11:59 pm
Oh, and in my first comment I meant most *phone* cameras have a fixed aperture” not most photo cameras… Sorry for the typo.
September 9, 2011 at 12:01 am
Except that it was the second comment and not the first.
(embarrassed, blushing)
Disqus and its edit feature have spoiled me rotten.
September 9, 2011 at 12:51 am
I always believe everything Lidia17 says, because I have never known her to be wrong. But Lidia — what about the “jpeg-snoop” in comment 70?
September 9, 2011 at 12:57 am
Respectfully disagree. I understand your point of view.
What difference does it make if anyone scans this shot, and looks very closely with a microscopic lens.
If it is authentic, fine.
If it isn’t authentic, better.
Who is to say what people working together can or can’t do because someone on the other side says they are crazy? They will say we who look at Palin and see her phoniness are nuts regardless. It is a free country, and so is Australia.
I think the bots are crazier and dangerous. And the right is beginning to say as much.
I follow my hunches. Read #40 AKshutterbug. Sarah Palin fakes her running. All photo Op.
If it is authentic we will find out as they did for the Gusty shot. Though that too was staged.
September 9, 2011 at 1:13 am
Good eyes, Oz Mud! The original photo from Gretawire shows the tip of the shoe on her leg, too, as well as the way the race number is pushing up her red sleeve. I hope Prof. Scharlott will weigh in on this.
September 9, 2011 at 1:40 am
1. It’s easier for Sarah to lie than it is to tell the truth.
2. No lie is too outrageous.
This should be at the top of Sarah Palin’s Wikipedia page.
September 9, 2011 at 2:01 am
Very good post. Of course the insufferable bitch lied about the race. only the stupid idiots believe she ran in that race. GVS said it was a joke. It’s another joke she is playing on her moneybags. It’s obvious to us because we know she is a fraud.
The hips on the woman don’t look like her hips fake fake fake. Where is her freakin trophy or ribbon? Where is toad?
September 9, 2011 at 2:08 am
@Lidia
The question of why no one looked up as a runner comes to join in at an angle has nothing to do with who the runner is. One would look up regardless.
The five phtos by Hannah L. Campbell are real as is the finish line photo. NOne of these six give the immediate impression of “somethings wrong here.” The start photo does that in spades.
Even if the start photo is real and true I still have a hard time believing that she ran thirteen 8 min. miles. That’s not to say that she couldn’t have, or that I couldn’t have. But a half marathon takes serious training and even that supposes that you’re in decent to good shape to begin with. From Wiki:
“Most people tend to run a half marathon before running a full marathon. A half marathon will help to physically prepare the body for the 42.195 kilometers (26.2 miles) that makes up a marathon. Running a half marathon is both physically and mentally demanding. For those who have never run this distance before, it is imperative to train correctly. It is advised to slowly build up endurance over a three month period; decreasing the intensity of the training in the last couple of weeks before the event. If the body is over-worked, injury is more likely to occur. It is also important to eat correctly and stay hydrated before, during, and after the race.”
I was a track and field competitor as a student (and a very good one though not a runner) so I paid attention to times, distances, heights etc.. It wasn’t until the 50s that anyone had run a sub 4 minute mile. Anyone anywhere. Now, I realize that that’s twice as fast as the reported 8 min.x 13 minute miles (‘course it’s only a one mile race). And I know the world record for the half marathon by a woman is around 1 hr. six min. A 1:45 thirteen mile run is very impressive to me especially when I consider that no one could run even just one mile in just half the time ever until the 50s.
I’m sure I’ll be told it’s apples and oranges but it’s my perspective. I don’t think that Palin put in the time and effort to run 13.1 consecutive, unpaused miles, let alone to have run that distance in 1 hour and 45 minutes.
September 9, 2011 at 2:10 am
Lidia17
“The reason Sarah is in focus and the others aren’t is because most photo cameras are cheap and have a fixed 2.8 aperture which imposes a shallow depth-of-field.”
———————————————————————————————-
Lidia17, please see comment #19 by VeryPolitik on ozmud’s ‘not to beat a dead horse’ post. VeryPolitik pointed out that the metadata for the first photo indicates it was taken with a Nikon D40.
I have a Nikon D40, it’s a digital SLR not a basic phone camera. I do not know what type of lens you could attach to the NIKON D40 that would produce that strange and limited ‘depth-of-field’ image. The ‘depth of field’ appears inconsistent across the photo.
September 9, 2011 at 2:10 am
You don’t just step out of the chopper, limo, SUV or whatever and run 13 miles in an hour and forty-five mintes is my nutshell.
September 9, 2011 at 2:17 am
Are you around Sarah 24/7? Do you personally know her daily habits? How can you, a distant observer, comment on her athletic ability?
Your whole post is whole of holes. If you blow up the original photo, there’s nothing wrong with it.
September 9, 2011 at 2:21 am
It’s easier for Sarah to lie than it is to tell the truth.
—
Allow me to introduce you to EVERY politician. They all embody that quote.
September 9, 2011 at 2:44 am
Take another look at the finish line photo. I lightened it using curves from Photoshop. She has two large stains just above her left knee. She either went running in dirty pants (that definitely could have happened!) or her sweat (water bottle) rolled off her shoulders and onto her thighs.
September 9, 2011 at 3:13 am
@LV
Are you around her 27/7? This isn’t about athleic ability. It’s about the want, the effort, the persistence, the finishing of something. None of those attributes are evident in the quitter half-term gov who lies about the time of day for chrissakes. Loved her response to a reporter’s question on the One Nation BS toiur, “This isn’t a publicity tour” Palin said. Then why is the bus wrapped with your name on it. F’in liar.
September 9, 2011 at 3:21 am
I don’t know how much this matters but there is a record of Sarah running 8 min miles. The 03 Menard 5k she ran in 23 min, the marathon in 05 she ran in 3:59.
September 9, 2011 at 3:22 am
For 86. Politicians lie easily for a purpose or to hide something or to evade. There is a goal.
Palin lies pathologically for all those reasons, also more detrimental, for no reason. It is impossible for her not to embellish a single kernal of truth into a whopper. Palin has her goals, but she would lie even if she wasn’t in politics. It is part of her psychological makeup.
She gets her kicks out of lying. It is a similar to kleptomania.
September 9, 2011 at 3:23 am
LV. Read #40 akshutterbug, re her 05 run.
September 9, 2011 at 3:25 am
Sorry #30. akshutterbug. Read about the High School runners being called out of class to run with her. She got her photo op and then never ran with the kids. She is a fraud and a fake to the tips of her manicured nails.
September 9, 2011 at 3:39 am
A note on why there are no other runners in the photo:
Among ALL competitors, Sarah finished in the middle of a LARGE gap which means there would not have been anyone in front or behind her in that finish photo.
The runner (including men) who finished directly in front of her by time (Julie Marks of Des Moines) ran in 1:45:05… a full 1 minute and 5 seconds ahead. On 8 minute mile pace, this is 1/8 mile, 660 feet or over 2 football fields, including end zones.
The runner directly behind her (Cathlen Borst of Carroll, IA) finished in 1:46:55 or 45 seconds behind Sarah Heath. That’s about 500 feet behind Sarah.
Local press accounts say Todd picked up the race packet and that they didn’t tell anyone she was running until after she was done. So it makes sense that nobody was surrounding her or paid much attention.
September 9, 2011 at 3:57 am
The starting line photo is such an obvious photoshop job as to be laughable. That’s the real story is why send that out?
But, some things to note:
The race results show 67 finishers. Sarah was #63 This is in line with someone who just shows up to race or registers late. HOWEVER, the event website clearly says “NO RACE DAY REGISTRATION” So she at least pre-registered in advance (or got a special favor).
There are nearly 50 people in the photoshopped starting line photo. You can’t make out any of the other numbers (in sharp contrast to Sarah’s crisp #63) but this means there are not very many runners out in front of Sarah so why the big hurry to move around everybody?
The course was a loop. http://www.stormlakerunningclub.com/coursemap.html Boy, there sure are a LOT of places that someone could have ducked out… waited a bit and then joined the race going the other way. Especially if there wasn’t anybody within 4 football fields of her. (See post above)
Overall, I think she ran the race, and recorded a good time. Somebody just sent out a really cruddy photoshop job and given that she is a noted and proven liar, it makes you wonder what she WON’T lie about. She is absolutely fit to run a race. To run a country, a state, or even a small town? No way.
September 9, 2011 at 4:19 am
O.K. I found someone who was running right behind her. and this is what she says. Lisa #21 comment. My best friend and I ran this race and were behind her the entire race. Honestly don’t think it was her. No security, no reporters. don’t think so. Sept 4.
Now this could be a 34 year old from Liberty Iowa who ran 1.47 or the 1.53 39 year old from Kansas.
This is from Gateway Pundit.com, Jim Hopt Sept 4 6:11 p.m.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/09/while-in-iowa-sarah-palin-runs-half-mile-marathon-in-145/ The woman lisa got the impression it was not really Sarah Palin. ????? She comments a few times.
Gets odder and oddr.
September 9, 2011 at 4:30 am
I hate posting links, usually miss a letter or two. This time I inserted the word mile, between half and marathon. I couldn’t see the link at the top so I typed in mile. I am not a runner.
I need an edit button, or should take more time, but someone could check on the race results, I keep running into blanks.
Certainly would be good to have another runner close to her establishing some of her observations as to what happened.
Just log into the gateway pundit.com article. I won’t attempt another link.
September 9, 2011 at 4:45 am
This is from the Dr. CBJ letter issued a day before the 2008 election:
Baldwin-Johnson added that Palin had had a breast biopsy in 1992 for what turned out to be a benign lesion, and that her patient’s vital signs, including blood pressure at 96 over 61 and a pulse of 77
***************************************************
A 77 pulse is NOT a runner’s pulse. A runner’s pulse would be in the 50′s especially for one who could run a 1:46 1/2 marathon.
September 9, 2011 at 4:57 am
No matter what Sarah Palin says, I wouldn’t believe her.
She IS the boy who cried Wolf once too often.
I find it funny that someone would be right by her and who doesn’t believe it is Sarah Palin.
Ya know, her insistance on bomb sniffing dogs, and all the security that she insists other people pay for, to show her great importance, and the dangers she faces.
Here she was icognito, none of her usual hoopla and circus act and no one cares one way or the other.
LOL.
September 9, 2011 at 5:05 am
Just_a_Mote (#83), sorry, I did not see that comment—thanks for pointing it out. I’m sure I had read that the picture was taken with a cell-phone camera. I still don’t think the photo looks all that strange for a shot taken with a shallow depth-of-field, though…
And doing the “walking back” exercise, if she was at the race, and did have a number, why go to the trouble of faking this photo? When it’s far simpler to just take a picture of her running by the crowd… It would make no sense.
I have read other runners saying that they have had to go on to the grass to get around walkers at similar events. It was just a small-town event, no marshalls, so I guess I don’t see the big deal. We may not know where she was coming *from* or where she was *going*, but I just can’t see my way clear to asserting that she was not where that photo shows in that moment.
I’m not going to stake my life on the issue, merely giving my own impressions.
I definitely think her performance was faked and I hope that new information will come out about the race which will belie the tale that has been told.
[We certainly cannot trust random people in comments saying that they were with her the whole time: "happy Palin" trolls are out in force over this. Gateway Pundit is a RWNJ site, with the emphasis on the "nut".]
September 9, 2011 at 5:11 am
I know. I read the comments. Very right wing.
I also see that training for a half marathon is very intensive. The Running Club in Iowa lists a 9 week training plan for this marathon in their brochure. Taken from Running World by Doug Rennee. Sound very time consuming and takes a lot of prep.
I’m not a runner. But I was in Ballet. If you didn’t do your barre work or warm ups, and slacked off, lactic acid buildup in my leg muscles would be excruciating.
September 9, 2011 at 6:33 am
I repeat what someone else has written.
HOWEVER, I’d like to go one step farther with the photoshop question.
1. It looks to me that the woman in the red sweater might very well be a runner in the race. “If needed”, the photo might have been lifted from a second photo of others starting in the race about the same time and placed into this one. As many people point out, one or all of her placement, size, and feet, just don’t look “right.” The lighting and her out-of-focus or fuzzy on her upper half look ok with the rest of the photo.
2a. The visor and the sunglasses could be added. The wide white band would have been hard to erase, so it probably had to stay.
2b. The runner left arm is completely missing. This might be because it is legitimately is not in view or chopping it off might have facilitated placing the woman in this photo. I was neutral on this, but I just looked at the pixels and the change in going from the red sweater pixels to the woman behind pixels looks artificial and different from the pixel transition patterns at other interfaces. (One exception is the bottom of the sweater, the pixel interface here looks abrupt also.)
3. Several issues with the area in the middle suggest tampering. The nice lady running this blog has pointed them many of these. To the casual observer, this photo shows one of the strangest placements of both the bottom of a sweater and number tag! That’s why many think the photo was at least staged. If staged, then I would argue that rolling up the bottom of a sweater would not stay up if the person were really running unless she held it up with that missing left arm and hand.
4a. ** What seems to me plausible is if an upper body has been added to a lower body. The lower half here matches Sarah’s lower half in her finish photo. **
4b. If the “designer” white mark is only under and on the outsde of one knee, then in lower body has been mirror-reversed when compared to Sarah at the finish line. However, it is possible that the mark is symmetric on both legs and just not observable on both legs in the two photos. I am neutral on this unless someone else can really tell. Person someone who runs would know whether such a mark is symmetric or not.
5. The pixelation on Sarah’s shoes seems to mix and mess with the true colors quite a bit. I would think one might expect some extra mixing if the original image of Sarah’s lower half had originally been smaller (less resolved) but had to be slightly magnified to get the overall size ok to match this new upper half.
SO, I am not a photoshop expert, and yet this image looks fishy enough that a journalist would have reason to pass it along to someone who is. Granted, it would be nice to have the original before compressed to suit the web. We can only work with what we have. No one has stepped forward as the photographer or original owner – nor will they!
I propose for consideration that the image of a runner (Sarah or not) has been taken from another photo taken of this runner at a similar time. The top of one runner has been added to the bottom of another runner (both might be Sarah – I don’t know) and the combination placed into the background of the photograph being circulated. The bottom half appear to be Sarah’s actual attire and “number”.
Cheating by politicians and/or “moral leaders”. Should it be ignored or not?
September 9, 2011 at 6:44 am
Brad has mentioned enhancement, and it sounds logical. He writes of it in Laura Novaks blog.
It would also explain why we find the photo odd.
The discussions are interesting stuff but beyond my scope. I’m an aim and shoot with a Nikon and while I have developed film with my husband (one of his hobbies was photography) who would have loved this discussion, I do know how one can enhance certain aspects of a picture in developing film into a finished product. I’m not talking photo shopping but simple enhancements.
September 9, 2011 at 7:01 am
Shadows…
The Storm Lake Running Club has some interesting information posted.
http://www.stormlakerunningclub.com/inspire_001_20110824.html
Runner Brian Lenzemeier did a lot of training to try to make his goal of running the 2011 Jump Right In and Run half-marathon is less than 100 minutes. He does a Q&A in the above article. There’s a picture of him running(!) at the finish line for the 2011 race. The watcher on the right in the photo of Sarah’s finish is also present for Brian and actually claps(!), along with others clapping on the left! Brian placed second in his age category with a time of 1:29:09:82, placing him 17 minutes before Sarah.
I think the shadows look “about” the same in Brian’s well earned finish to those in Sarah’s effortless finish. I am not an expert. The shadows in the photo of the overall winner look shorter, but they should be longer if anything. I think the magnification used for the photo (if different between two photos) might make it hard to compare length of shadow with height of person.
September 9, 2011 at 7:02 am
From the Storm Lake Pilot Tribune, is this their way of hinting something ain’t right??
http://www.stormlakepilottribune.com/story/1760728.html
“Brenda McVinua was among the Storm Lakers Palin chatted with after the race. McVinua was working as a volunteer in the “chute” near the finish line, and was impressed with the former vice-presidential candidate’s form. “She wasn’t even breathing hard. You could tell she’s an athlete. If you didn’t know better you would have thought she’d just run around the block once or twice.”
September 9, 2011 at 7:05 am
For what it’s worth, after cranking the ‘hovering Sarah’ photo through a handful of analysis tools (most notably one based on Neal Krawetz’s Error Level Analysis algorithm), I can find nothing to suggest it is anything other than an actual, unmodified (other than possibly ‘image enhanced’) photo. (The ELA tool is designed specifically to detect possible indications that a jpeg image contains added or modified elements.)
Feel free to check it out yourselves. The tool can be found at http://errorlevelanalysis.com/ . For information on ELA (and an irreplaceable trove of information on performing image analysis), see Kravetz’s blog: http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/
September 9, 2011 at 7:08 am
“You could tell [Palin]’s an athlete. If you didn’t know better you would have thought she’d just run around the block once or twice.”
That’s all she probably ran (lol)
September 9, 2011 at 7:21 am
I do find all the pushback very interesting, both from “trolls” and from “known” posters. For me, also as an Anon, these are one and the same for the few years we have been on this topic so intensely. I am sorry but that is how I look at it. There is truly no way to verify anyone’s identity, including my own; even the IP addresses are not definitive proof of anything.
She has had people helping her from the very beginning in this regard, I believe.
For those who are sincerely concerned we are barking up the wrong tree, I do apologize. You have the right to your viewpoint, I just don’t happen to be too worried about it.
There is something strange about these photos, period. For all kinds of reasons, and not just the technical ones which those who have far more knowledge can speak to better than I.
Isn’t it just so convenient that Sarah happened to pull to the side of the crowd for the mid-race photo (or start up, whichever), and also so convenient that she happened to finish the race when others were nowhere near her? Honestly, what are the odds of BOTH of those circumstances arising for her, for these photos? Why not one photo of her during the race, in the middle of the other runners? From anyone out there? Surely there must be someone who recognized her and took a photo.
Isn’t it odd that she felt the need to have privacy for the race, but was perfectly fine to have Greta advertise it and to Tweet and/or Facebook about it once it was over? Why wouldn’t she alert the press from the beginning? She does for every other appearance she makes. They could have given her completely unimpeachable documentation of her participation.
I know nothing about marathon running, but people’s testimony re the training aspect is very, very, very compelling. This lady is human, she would have to build stamina. She would relish the attention for her practice runs, as well, I would imagine. Why nothing on this, ever, except when she supposedly runs a race? Also so freaking strange. And very convenient.
I bet I could come up with more, but why are all of these factors in alignment, in her favor? Because it never happened? Or because the odds were with her, and it did (and she does train but no one sees her, ever)?
I would love for someone to do a statistical analysis of these things and tell us how likely it would be for someone to have both a total blackout on every aspect except the particular photos a fan produces as proof of this particular race. Makes one go hmmmmmm.
September 9, 2011 at 7:57 am
Having a hard time finding info on shoulder sweating. Maybe I’m not doing it right. I type in ‘shoulder sweating.’ LOL
September 9, 2011 at 8:01 am
Keep in mind that a half marathon is 13.1 mile and is nothing like a marathon which is 26 miles 385 yards. It is rightly said that there are 2 halves of a marathon : the first 20 miles and the last 10K. Sarah’s alleged feat is nothing compared to a marathon. That said, a 1:46 time is very respectable.
September 9, 2011 at 8:03 am
Removing the bib tag….
You know. These things just don’t ad up. I was about to post about the Storm Lake Running Club announcement on its website that 2011 pictures would be posted for purchase. I go to the link and find the 2010 photos. So.. I just browse through them and notice that (1) there always people greeting people when they finish and (2) there’s one fairly aggressive man who keeps taking off their bib tags as they just finish. It seemed rather rude, but I guess that is how they connect person with run time.
Then I see one of the comments just posted her about a new article and photo here:
http://www.stormlakepilottribune.com/story/1760728.html
The article states: ‘ Only after a worker removed Palin’s bib tag did people start to see her correct name, and soon flocked around her. “People kept talking about it, thinking maybe someone had just written that as a joke. I’m not sure who figured it out, but then people were all there talking to her.” ‘
So why does Sarah still have her bib tag in this new photo here with her flock of admirers? In 2010, that guy was virtually ripping them off as they arrived!! The article implied they did not know who she was until the worker removed her bib tag. Did the co-chairs Troy and Grace Ivey (in the photo) know all along and have their family waiting at the end? Did Sarah put it back on for the photo op?
In this article we also find out the mysterious red sweater is a “worn sweatshirt.”
I am still unconvinced and will return to my normal routine anyway. It is hard to push when there are people will ing to lie for her. There’s no way that I believe Sarah plopped in and ran 13 miles in an amazing short time without looking like she had done so at the end.
The quote above in #104 (Ang) states: “She wasn’t even breathing hard. You could tell she’s an athlete. If you didn’t know better you would have thought she’d just run around the block once or twice.”
This is exactly the same as: “She simply did not look pregnant!”
September 9, 2011 at 8:19 am
Amy, #68:
In your left picture, you say it looks like the white stripe is from a white background from another picture.
Maybe that is why the rest of her black pants from there on are so fuzzy? (Looks like it was painted-in or something)
September 9, 2011 at 8:38 am
OZ, #69: The shoes in-between the red runners legs looks like they come from someone who is standing still, with both legs together (i.e. it looks to me like there is part of the left shoe, but also a very small part of a right shoe visible!) – not at all how it should be if those shoes belonged to that woman in white with the grey shorts.
Lydia #73: You can see something sticking above the red sleeved arm if you enlarge the original photo. So, the ‘neonizing’ did NOT add anything that was not there.
Also, too: If you are correct, and the photo is NOT photoshopped, then $arah should have a sorely sprained ankle from stepping halfways onto that curb. And the woman right next to her would have run into her at that point when she stepped onto the pavement.
September 9, 2011 at 8:43 am
LV… Is that you, $arah? (Or one of her minions?)
September 9, 2011 at 9:05 am
#97: a 77 resting pulse rate is DEFINITELY not a runners. I am older than Granny Grifter, female, and am NOT an athlete whatsoever (or, maybe I should clarify this: I *am* an armchair athlete…:P ), and MY resting pulse is 72.
OTOH, her BP is VERY low – she probably would have to watch out so she does not faint standing up fast…
September 9, 2011 at 9:29 am
OK. One more thing, and then, I promise, I will shut up for a while!:
Supposedly she wrote her name on the bottom of the runners bib. (“She entered under her maiden name, Sarah Heath, and had her husband pick up here race packet, but did write her real name in small lettering on her bib racing number, allowing her to be recognized at the end of the event.”) WHERE IS IT IN THIS PICTURE???
https://secure.flickr.com/photos/hannahlcampbell/6112853629/in/set-72157627468163637/lightbox/
September 9, 2011 at 9:39 am
OK, I lied… Here I am again… : WHERE IS $ARAH’S NAME???
http://www.stormlakerunningclub.com/jri2011placewinners.html
September 9, 2011 at 10:24 am
@fedup – Sarah allegedly took second place in her category, not the event itself. That list is for the actual winners of all the categories in each event. (compare it to the pdf file and you’ll see.)
She’s got her medal draped over her arm what more do ya want? *snicker*
September 9, 2011 at 11:40 am
OZ: No, it is 1st, 2nd and 3rd place in all the categories… (at least that is my interpretation…) :
Half-marathon: Male
1st: Justin Helbing, Storm Lake, 1:18:52.95
2nd: Nathan Wenck, Carroll, 1:23:41.18
3rd: Rob Jaycox, Denison, 1:24:29.54
Half-marathon: Female
1st: Lindsey Meyer, Storm Lake, 1:38:10.62
2nd: Cari Rosno, Des Moines, 1:40:53.00
3rd: Ashley Loehr, 1:42:46.35
Half-marathon relay: Women
1st: Annamaria Elsden/Lori Foster, Storm Lake/Webster City, 1:40.59**
2nd: Jamie Grieme/Tessa Rydberg, Schaller, 1:43.30
3rd: Jill Else/Krystal Phillips, Holstein, 1:48.58
Her time should have been in the 1/2 marathon relay – remember somewhere it said that she was part of a team?
September 9, 2011 at 11:51 am
@FEDUP – each of those categories is again broken into age groups – Sarah took second in her age group of 40-49 but the placements you list represent overall winners of all the groups, 20-29, 30-39, 40-49 (I probably should have used the term age group rather than category – sorry, mybad.)
Shh. I have to wOrk!
September 9, 2011 at 10:47 pm
At the race’s finish, the perforated bottom of the bib is ripped off by the officials to keep for the tallies.
September 10, 2011 at 1:13 am
I remain as puzzled at the end of this discussion as I was in the beginning. So much of anything this woman does doesn’t ever pass the smell test. She is like a stinky dubvious fish. I might prod it, look at it with my nose wrinkled in disgust, but I certainly wouldn’t buy or eat it even if they did dip it in some disinfectant.
Everything, everything about her is bogus, and always , always for the photo op.
My last feeling last nite was a reluctant bow to Brad and the photo enhancement angle.
My last feeling is that she cheated as she always. does.
She is not an athlete, except in logging luxury jet miles and switching from plane to the buses she was supposed to have been riding in from town to town on her book tour.
Palin is a lazy woman. about everything she does. She won’t put in the work or effort except to gain money.
I’m a lazy woman, but when I was younger and fitter, I put in the work and sweat to do something well athletically, be it swimming or ballet. And you don’t jump into something this intensive without sweat and effort. Sorry, Natalie Portman may have trained hard, but she certainly didn’t dance the Black Swan in Swan Lake, someone else did it for her and they spliced footage.. (I didn’t watch the movie, I thought it was dreadful.)
My last word is, that as usual with Palin, this doesn’t pass the smell test.
September 10, 2011 at 12:48 pm
A couple of observations from zooming into the images of both her running across the grass and checking her time at the finish …
- if you zoom in tight, you’ll notice a zone of distorted pixels that run roughly parallel to her body (e.g. in front of right knee in the grass photo). This is a often seen in photoshopped images. To reduce a line from the cut and paste, you blend between the background image and the superimposed image. You see a similar affect to the left of palin’s shoe in the finishing photo and on both sides of her waist in that same image. Full disclosure, this sort of ‘ghosting’ can also be a result of the image processing software in the camera.
- there appears to be a body-less foot between her legs in the grass photo. Look at the heel of the back foot of the woman running to palin’s left … there a shoe in the image directly behind that woman’s heel. The foot might be attached to the next person back however the depths of the foot and of the person do not appear to match (by depth i mean depth of field or distance into the image). Tough call I know but the person seems to be further into the background than the extra foot.
- in the finish photo, the pixel density seems to change between palin’s chin and cheek. if you look at her chin, you can see pixels. however immediately above that, around her cheek, no pixels. this can happen if you are working on an image using a higher resolution than that of the original photo. photoshop overwrites the coarser pixel density with a much finer one.
- look for straight lines … note the back of palin’s right quad in the grass photo and the right hip in the finish photo. when photoshopping, it’s tempting to get lazy and cut straight along lines that are basically straight (but really aren’t). You also tend not to blend along those areas since they seem to ‘work’ without it. The result is a sharp line like you see in the two locations noted that contrasts with the areas where you are more careful.
- another curious thing can be seen in the highlighted or ‘haloed’ image. in the grass photo, notice how sharp the contrast is on the back side of the right arm … it is clearly highlighted by the halo affect. but then look immediately behind her elbow – not highlighted. one might argue that this is due to the change in contrast between the red/white of the shirt vs the red/grey of the short. However the halo returns as your round under the elbow which is also contrasted against the grey shorts. Suggests to me that there is some blurring of pixels through part of the image. again, a classic photoshop issue.
ok so none of these things are definitive – image processing artifacts can explain much of them – but they do make you think.
BB