In the New York Times, Steele apparently said Palin's hair needed "emergency help," because, according to the reporter, it was thinning. Then Steele went on the Twitter and Tweeted one hundred thousand times that that was a terrible liberal media LIE. And then she protected her Twitter updates. And then someone from the Boston Globe called up her hair salon to talk about it. And Steele, who probably doesn't know that the Globe is owned by the lying liberals of the Times, explained that the "hair emergency" was actually just that Sarah Palin's hair was no longer shiny.
"I think the combination of traveling and just being down there in the lower 48'' took its toll, Steele said in what was either a brilliant bit of spin, the simple truth, or an attempt to save the good stuff for a cut-and-tell memoir. "We needed to get her back to shiny.''
She gave Palin a much-needed trim, she said, and "kicked up'' Palin's shampoo and conditioner a notch, to the high-end Pureology NanoWorks line. She also gave Palin a chichi leave-in treatment, Altieri Brothers Tuscan Oil.
Right. So that's settled. Except why is this story dated tomorrow? And through what medium will Steele explain that she was misquoted, again, and that Sarah Palin's hair has never, ever needed a "kick up," and why is this even still a story anyway, damn the media jackals? We hope she starts a Tumblr called "Fuck Yeah Sarah Palin's Hair."