So this is what this race has come down to? Arguing about the fecundity of Sarah Palin's daughter? This is news because . . . ?
Because Sarah Palin lied about sex? So let me get this straight. Bill Clinton using a White House intern like a cheap whore in the Oval Office and lying about same under oath: not a problem. Sarah Palin relieving her sixteen year old of the burden of raising a special needs child: a huge character issue. This sounds like a parody of the ridiculous beliefs that social conservatives attribute to liberals.
Because Sarah Palin is a bad mother? Because only bad mothers have children who do unwise, risky, and even immoral things? Apparently every single person in my high school class had bad parents, 100% of whom were liberals.
One might also comment on the belief that a woman cannot be a good leader unless and until she is a good mother. If one of Barack Obama's girls gets caught shoplifting, do we impeach him?
Because Sarah Palin is a social conservative and therefore a hypocrite? About what? Which social conservatives guarantee that raising your children with good values will prevent them from getting pregnant? Indeed, I believe that's why they want to make the rest of us watch G movies--because they think society has effects on people.
Because Sarah Palin made the decision to keep the Down's baby a selling point? I'm sorry, did I miss the press release where she gave Trig away now that the secret is out? I'd think it's rather more admirable to take on a special needs baby that you didn't give birth to. No hormones flooding you with a nesting instinct, no oxytocin rush to bond you to the baby; just a firm committment to do the right thing by a baby who's going to take a lot of care.
Because Sarah Palin should have encouraged her daughter to get an abortion? When did pro-choice become pro-abortion?
Because social conservatives are against sex education emphasizing birth control? This would be vastly more compelling if there were any good evidence that sex education emphasizing birth control works any better than sex education emphasizing abstinence. Unfortunately, neither seems to work very well--something that is bizarrely missed by liberals every time a study comes out on the benefits of abstinence-only education. Abstinence-only doesn't reduce teen pregnancies! they trumpet gleefully, somehow failing to notice what this implies about the effectiveness of birth-control education.
I'm very sure that an upper-middle class governor's daughter was not unaware of what causes babies, or how the babies might be prevented, or what aisle on the drugstore contains the means of prevention. She got pregnant either because she chose to ignore that knowledge, or because something went wrong. How many of the sniffily self-righteous commentators have never missed a pill, or had the condom break, or simply not had them to hand and thought, well, just this once . . . ?
Because all the hyperventilating Obama supporters pretending that they are genuinely morally outraged are willing to say anything to get him elected, even if if means prying into the personal life of a seventeen year old girl who has just been thrust into adulthood in a humiliatingly public way? Oh, right . . .
Sorry, I must have been confused. I thought I lived in a civilized society.
This is news, of course. But it is not particularly interesting news. It's hardly the first shotgun wedding the world has ever witnessed, not even of a prominent politician's daughter. It has basically nothing to do with her fitness to be the vice president. The people acting as if this matters deeply should be as ashamed of themselves as they claim to be of Sarah Palin's behavior.
The conspiracy theorizing about Trig is more deeply worrying. They require that, on the one hand, Sarah Palin masterminded an elaborate conspiracy that fooled the media; and that on the other hand, she didn't bother to obtain a pregnancy girdle, which are readily available at theatrical supply shops without showing ID, and fairly comfortable. She also had a doctor willing to falsify a birth certificate . . . but not the date. She knew her daughter had a high-risk pregnancy, but chose to travel to somewhere it would be difficult to fake the birth, even though her (faked) condition would have given her a perfectly reasonable excuse not to.
All this, mind you, to conceal something that hasn't been a dark and shameful secret for thirty years or so, in a Republican state that isn't particularly socially conservative. So why are all these allegedly intelligent adults pretending that they find this at all likely?
On Sarah Palin as a VP I have no particular opinion, except that she doesn't make me any more interested in voting for John McCain. But the people criticizing her are making me considerably less interested in voting for Obama. If this sort of deranged logic produces unwavering support for Obama, I have to question my own judgement.
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Megan,
I agree the preggie issue is not relevant. Why don't you discuss some of the other issues?? where should I begin? supported bridge to nowhere, not really a reformer, ran an Stevens 527, troopergate etc. The most damaging is membership in AIP. Note that they ask their members to INFILTRATE mainstream parties so they can be in position of power to advance AIPs interests. Any thoughts? Can we quit talking about the teen pregnancy when there are so many other issues? Really want you to know what you think about that. Alaska first or country first?
You said: "I'd think it's rather more admirable to take on a special needs baby that you didn't give birth to." Um, Megan, you seem to have bought the insane conspiracy theory that Trig isn't really Sarah Palin's son. HE IS. Please correct this.
Also, if John Edwards was the father, the media would ignore this story as long as they could.
I'm a pretty ardent blogophile, but I've not seen a single one of the arguments you've posted made anywhere. Of course, my reading is biased to the wonkier blogs (like yours).
Other than Andrew Sullivan, I've seen very little judgement passed on the Palins. What are you reading?
This is news because no one was allowed to print spculation on the contraception John Edwards used or failed to use.
Now the newsies can get it all out of their system.
Megan, the points you cite are yesterday's news, and the result, in part, of the Palins deciding to push Bristol onstage for some inscrutable reason of their own.
As for Palin's credentials:
1) Trooper gate
2) Membership of the Alaskan Independence Party
3) Supported the Bridge to Nowhere and lied about it
4) Railed against corruption and ran Ted Stevens' 527
5) Railed against pork and collected it by the ton as Mayor of Wasilla (having engaged a lobbyist to do so)
6) Claims to be fiscally conservative, but increased spending in Wassila by 33%, increased taxes by 38%
7) Vindictive practitioner of cronyism - including attempting to fire the City Librarian of Wasilla for refusing to censor the library's books.
I don't know about your mileage, but in my opinion this is hardly the resume of a responsible adult, let alone someone fit to be president.
What does Obama have to do with any of this? He made a perfectly commendable statement on the matter yesterday and I don't think we hear anything else from his campaign.
This is about the New York Times confusing itself with the National Enquirer. Maybe they're worried about getting scooped again, a la John Edwards.
But it's sad, not because the story of her unwed pregnant daughter is totally irrelevant, but because it takes away valuable airtime and ink from a discussion of the legitimate reasons why Sarah Palin is unfit for office.
Trust me, the last thing those of us backing Obama want to see is CNN turning Sarah Palin into a sympathetic figure.
Let's focus on the fact that she's an inexperienced, anti-abortion, pro-gun Creationist with a horrible environmental record and a predilection for using her office to pursue personal vendettas. On top of this, she was unable to go 48 hours as a candidate on the national stage without getting caught in at least 2 blatant lies and was a member of a secessionist political party in Alaska, which is bound to play well with flag-waving Republicans. Or the fact that this naked play for Clinton voters using a woman who is Hillary Clinton's political opposite is pathetic and insulting to women and Senator Clinton.
Wow, someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. There are serious questions being raised about Palin by serious people. She has shown a clear willingness to lie (which she could get away with in Alaska). The circumstances surrounding the birth of her fifth child--the one SHE chose to use for political gain--are, to put it mildly, fishy. Many easily answered questions remain unanswered. Why?
Get over yourself McArdle. Stop being "deeply worried." There's news here.
Megan-
Welcome back!
Your wait-and-see attitude on Governor Palin is probably wise. I think we'll all have a very different impression of her after she gets the chance to introduce herself at the convention this week, and then yet another impression of her after the debate next month.
Congratulations on rising above the blogosphere's demand for an instant strongly-held viewpoint.
Just out of curiosity, would it make you more inclined to vote for McCain-Palin if it turns out she's basically a libertarian?
You might want to edit your post, Megan. I don't think you have enough strawmen in them.
I agree with everything Megan says here but I'd like to raise one point: Does allowing the reaction of some of Senator Obama's supporters to influence your interest in voting for him -- especially when Senator Obama has made it explicitly clear that Sarah Palin's family life is and should be out of bounds for discussion -- make any more sense than attacking Governor Palin for something that her daughter did? Say we forget about Bristol's pregnancy and never talk about it again, there are still a host of questions left about Governor Palin's character and judgement as a public official and candidate for office: the alleged abuse of power in trying to have her brother-in-law fired, the fact that she was for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it, in direct contradiction to her assertions since Friday on the campaign trail, the fact that she has a history of waging political vendettas against lower level officials. If Bristol's pregnancy and pending marriage were the only blemish on Palin's political profile you could say that people are over reacting. But that just ain't the case it seems.
Well said Megan. Some bloggers and other media who should know better, such as your blogging neighbour two doors down, have lost their moral bearings with some of their criticisms of the Palin family.
You should read, "the Importance of Writing a Quality Column". Clearly, you are defensively writing this out of desperation because everything that has come to light about the Palins has shown not only their hypocrisy but the hypocrisy of McCain as well, in choosing Palin.
"But the people criticizing her are making me considerably less interested in voting for Obama. If this sort of deranged logic produces unwavering support for Obama, I have to question my own judgement."
And, to be perfectly blunt, your ability to write a statement like that makes me question my judgment in continuing to read this blog.
What an incredibly sloppy piece of logic! It takes no effort whatsoever to find extremists, ideologues, and nutjobs who support McCain and Obama. Sure, they employ deranged logic. But who cares?
The relevant questions are these:
- Do the views of these supporters in any way reflect the views of the candidates themselves?
In this case, Obama's heartfelt statement, reminding reporters that he is himself the child of a single mother and pleading with them to leave the families of candidates out of the race, would seem to suggest not. In fact, Obama went quite a bit further on this issue than I'd be prepared to go - if there's reason to question Obama, it's in setting too high a bar for the relevance of personal conduct.
- Has the candidate courted or pandered to such supporters, even if he does not actually share their views?
Again, I'd challenge you to find evidence that he is. Because it does not exist.
- Is there any reason to believe that the election of the candidate would strengthen the hand of such supporters, whether or not he wishes it?
And, once again, I don't see how that's likely.
You got carried away, Megan. Go ahead; condemn the conspiracy theorists. They deserve every bit of it. But take the time and trouble to note that the campaign is a step ahead of you; Obama himself condemned all of this yesterday.
I think you're only seeing a small part of the pushback against Palin, what's most obvious and salacious. Certainly, some people are running with the hypocrisy/pregnancy angle, and I agree, that's wrong (though it is certainly understandable that people have and express opinions about it -- the right wing in his country made that almost an imperative), but what most Obama supporters are strongly pushing is the "deranged logic" of John McCain. John McCain picked as his running mate someone he met exactly once, began really vetting only after he announced her, spoke to seemingly no one in Alaska about, insultingly compared favorably to Hillary Clinton (and Obama, for that matter), and, most puzzlingly, completely negated his entire months-long line of attack against Barack Obama. And now everyone finds out that she lied in her introduction to America -- she most certainly desired that "bridge to nowhere," and rather than being a mavericky maverick reformer, she ran Ted Stevens' 527, is under investigation for abuse of power, and for two years in the 1990s was a member of a radical fringe political party that, quoting from its home page, has "no use for America or her damned institutions," per its founder. Unfortunately for everybody, it apparently takes a sad, hypocritical sex scandal -- like an unmarried 17-year-old daughter of an abstinence-only proponent -- to get the media to pay attention to the fact that John McCain has absolutely no idea who this person he selected as his VP candidate is, other than she excites the religious right base of his party. THAT should be what everyone is focusing on, and, one hopes, that will be.
You're nutpicking, Megan. Prurient blogger interest in Trig and Bristol is not surprising in the blogosphere, no more than the fact that the Clinton Death List has been updated to become the Obama death list. Tarring Obama supporters with raising this issue, especially when Obama himself issued such a strong "shut the hell up, people" statement himself, is allowing the silliest to influence you.
The majority of the reporting I've seen has been raising the other, much more relevant issues that others have listed here. Pretending that bastard-gate is the lead story among those criticizing Palin is a huge strawman.
Sarah may be able to take her baby to work with her and nurse during a meeting as Governor of Alaska - a state with a population of 626,000 people. It is a different story being the VP of the United States. No CEO in any corporation would do such a thing. I think a woman with children is certainly capable of being the VP or president of the US, but I do question the judgment and "family first" priority of a new mother with a newborn having special needs.
When it comes down to it, where will her allegiance be? With the MILLIONS of people relying upon her to lead the country, or with her children, whether they be pregnant, sick or whatever the issue? Will she be in the Middle East brokering a peace deal and suddenly have to fly home to attend to the health care needs of her infant son? She would be a cruel, heartless mother if she did no less, but she will be an ineffective, laughable joke of a world leader if she places her family priorities ahead of her country.
Well, Osama von McIntyre, I guess Eliot (and, if you follow the links, Andrew Sullivan) have answered your question. Obviously a good part of the blogosphere--the hysterical part that daily seethes with contempt for "breeders"--is very suspicious of the circumstances of Trig's birth.
Eliot-
This somehow feels familiar. Oh, yeah. "Bush Lied! People Died!"
Can you give me an example of some lies you think Governor Palin has told over the weekend? I must not have been paying attention.
Clearly, you are defensively writing this out of desperation
Desperation to...what, exactly? What would lead an Obama supporter to desperately try to deflect criticism of McCain's VP choice?
And why am I bothering, anyway? It seems likely this thread is going to rapidly collapse into 200 rounds of name-calling...
The ur-story in all this is simply that McCain obviously didn't vet Palin at all, and is being predictably surprised with all the baggage that any politician carries, and is unprepared to respond smoothly. I care less about Palin than about McCain's 'mavericky' judgement here.
Why, Megan, did you not make any mention of the fact that Obama explicitly stated the families are off-limits? He even did so using personal terms, as his mother had him when she was 18.
The pregnancy issue is insignificant. What is significant is Palin's association with the Alaska Independence Party, the fact that she ran a 527 for Ted Stevens, the fact that she lied about being against the "bridge to nowhere." All which are less significant still than the fact that McCain made a very, very important decision without much seriousness at all.
MagikJack-
"Will she be in the Middle East brokering a peace deal and suddenly have to fly home to attend to the health care needs of her infant son?"
Why on earth would she have to do that?
Todd Palin seems like a perfectly competent father, and he's been a stay-at-home dad taking care of the kids since Sarah was elected Governor.
Are you suggesting that fathers are not competent to care for their children?
(I refer you to the Anchorage Daily News
http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/story/8924080p-8824177c.html
from more than a year ago, describing the "First Dude", including his role in the home -- cooking, cleaning, and caring for the kids.
Good thing he's a steel worker, commercial fisherman, and champion snowmobile racer --- it will be hard for anyone to suggest that caring for his kids makes him less of a man.)
Hello? Getting high-minded in the era of the "terrorist fist bump"? Please.
Regardless, I'm going to echo numerous other posters in saying:
1) Obama has not touched this issue. He has made a clear, unambiguous statement to the contrary. You may object to how many of his ostensible supporters are reacting to this news, but equating their reactions with Obama's is intellectually sloppy.
2) Great, Bristol's pregnancy is off the table. So, what about Sarah's repeated public dishonesty? Her abuses of power and lawyering up? Her inconsistent record on reforms and earmarks? Her lack of understanding about what the VP does? Any comments about ANY of that?
Megan,
The invasion of the wider Palin family is of course reprehensible (as Obama has made very, very clear), and I don't doubt there is some very unsavoury left wingnutry to be found out there.
The point about abstinence education is that it is ineffectual as you say, so surely people ought to be put in possession of the information and contraceptives and given the choice, or at least social conservatives should be asked to explain themselves, why they keep insisting on abstinence education as a viable option for dealing with the teenage pregnancies that everyone agrees are u8ndesirable.
It looks as if the Bristol's boy friend is going to be pressured into a shotgun marriage that he says he doesn't want, presumably all to facilitate the McCain campaign's cynical political play. All this is in the public domain and should be discussed respectfully.
The issue is not so much Sarah Palin and her family (though whether Sarah is ready to be veep is a question of some importance) but John McCain's reckless, cynical and hypocritical ('country first') judgment that is at issue here. Where are the signs of any vetting before she and her family were hurled into this maelstrom?
That you would be just as happy to vote for McCain after this and disinclined to vote for Obama because of the opinions of some very silly people suggests a seriousness quite on a par with the McCain campaign. Perhaps the McCain-Palin ticket really is right for you.
Megan,
"But the people criticizing her are making me considerably less interested in voting for Obama."
If we can't for candidates who also garner the support of people whose political views, words and deeds disgust us, then we can't vote at all.
Can we?
Or does this highlight that the Democrats made a very, very important decision without much seriousness at all?
It is so great when the circus comes to town.
The latest act features a VP candidate with aguably more executive administrative experience than either of the Presidential candidates, yet her inexperience is an issue. Nader, Barr, McKinney - all the rings are filled with acts.
Can we figure out, by election day, which act isn't a clown act?
On the bridge to nowhere:
Of course she supported it. Every governor supports getting every federal dollar they can. What's remarkable is that she responded to criticism of it and opposed it.
Consider that neither of Alaska's Senators or their Rep. opposed it. In fact they increased their support in face of criticism. Also consider that supporting the bridge would not have been an unpopular position in Alaska.
Find me one other governor that opposed a significant federal earmark for their state.
I didn't read all the comments, so forgive me if someone else has already addressed this. Here is why Bristol's pregnancy is relevant: If Palin were to become President, and were she to implement her views on birth control/abortion/sex-ed; every young woman in the US would have to go the route of Bristol Palin!!!! They wouldn't have a choice!
Jeez Megan, I thought you'd pick up on such an obvious point.
Megan,
Why are you repeating as fact the rumor (that Palin has denied) that Trig is Palin's grandson and not her son? What are you basing this on?
That's right Tyler. The Feds are going to force all teenage girls to carry their kids to term without the possibilty of abortion, because all conservatives want to keep abortion as a federal issue, rather than a state issue.
Boy is this a dumb piece of fake outrage. I have not seen anyone accusing Palin of hypocrisy. or attacking the daughter. You can sit there all day and boldly denounce attacks that are not coming.
there are two troubling issues here
First: Palin was confronting rumors that Trig was not her baby. These rumors may have been scurrilous and unfounded. She could have easily refuted them by showing the birth certificate, as Obama did when confronted by rumors he was not born in the US. Instead, she chose to counter the rumors about Trig by "outing" her 17 year old daughter. That's how SHE explained it! What kind of person does that?
Second, the issue is McCain--did he bother to do, or have his staff do, the homework that a choice like this requires? That's why this issue persists. It's not at all hard to understand,. but less fun than fake umbrage
100% of the parents of the kids in your high school class were liberals?
McCain gambles the future of this nation by shooting from the hip and with a nakedly political move names an unqualified running mate who he hopes will appeal simultaneously to the disgruntled far-right conservatives and the disaffected Clinton progressives. He claims, incredulously, that her time as a beauty-queen mayor in a town of 8,000 (and who as a Creationist not only believes the earth was created in six days but supports teaching the same religious dogma in your child’s science class) is the intellectual equivalent to being President of the Harvard Law Review. McCain chooses political theater over national security by professing his future Vice President’s executive experience fighting for oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge has prepared her for being one heartbeat away from taking on a belligerent Iran, an unstable Pakistan, a resurgent Russia and an unfinished Iraq.
The prime requirement of a Vice President is readiness to step into the office of President at a moment’s notice. Period. As a former naval aviator, it is unconscionable that Senator McCain would take an enormous tactical risk that leaves the nation without a parachute.
Rob,
Not noted in your post is the fact that while she ended up opposing the bridge, she kept the money and used it on other things.
McCain has been opposing earmarks, period, not certain ones, all of them, and claims to have never sought one for his state (something that has yet to be refuted in any reporting that I've seen). Good for him. But in this case money earmarked for one thing was voted, accepted (as opposed to being refused and returned to the treasury) and spent.
So what's your point?
Prediction-
Palin's convention speech will the most watched one this election cycle.
Uhhhhh -- I agree with the sentiments. But the post is crud, not because it's wrong, but because I think you're getting the Sarah-Palin-not-a-scandal-scandal that wasn't confused with the Sarah-Palin-not-a-scandal-scandal that was. I think you can untangle it all, rewrite the post, it'll come out good. Then I'll be in agreement.
It's cool. I had a long weekend too and it moved fast, and it was hard to get it straightened out.
drdannyu-
"2) Great, Bristol's pregnancy is off the table. So, what about:"
a) "Sarah's repeated public dishonesty?"
Examples, please.
b) "Her abuses of power and lawyering up?"
I've seen allegations. Any proven actual abuses?
c) "Her inconsistent record on reforms and earmarks?"
Still beats the pants off a consistent record on the wrong side, no?
d) "Her lack of understanding about what the VP does?"
Poppycock.
Go back and watch the full statement (most of the youtube clips chop off immediately at the end of "... the VP does every day." That wasn't the end of her answer. And the rest of the answer provides important context.
The VP is a job that has changed radically over time, and means something brand new in every administration.
She was saying that she wouldn't want to leave a job where she can continue to accomplish important things for Alaskans if the post she'd be filling was going to be primarily ceremonial (funerals and ribbon-cuttings).
Just out of curiosity, can you tell me what Vice President Cheney does on a daily basis? How about what Vice President Gore did? Think it's the same?
It was inevitable that the Bristol story was coming out. I trust we all understand how the American media work. I would expect the staff of a presidential campaign, and an experienced politician like Palin, to understand this too, much as I would have expected John Edwards to understand that news of his affair would come out.
So, the story is out, and it will dominate the news cycle for at least a few days and have a longer residual effect. It's awful for Bristol Palin to have to go through this; her mother no doubt considered that when she decided to accept the nomination. And the story, obviously, precipitates a discussion centering on 1. social values around teenage sexuality and 2. government policy towards teen reproductive health.
Evangelicals and Republicans are, naturally, doing their best to propound their version of "family values" around this story: Palin is pro-life, she's living her convictions, these kinds of tragedies can happen in any family.
This contention is wrong. Teen pregnancy can happen in any family, but it's less likely to happen in families that discuss sex non-judgmentally with their children and teach them how to handle it responsibly and how to use contraceptives. That goes for sexually transmitted diseases as well. And societies that promote knowledge about sexual health rather than ignorance have lower rates of teen pregnancy and STDs. The world's lowest rate of teen pregnancy is in the Netherlands. Needless to say, the Netherlands does not have the world's lowest rate of teen sex: it's about the same as the US's. The US has the highest rate of teen pregnancy among wealthy countries.
Sarah Palin, like the rest of the GOP, believes very strongly that the state should teach teenagers that sex outside of marriage is bad, but that it should not teach them how to avoid getting pregnant or how to avoid contracting an STD when they do have sex, as most teenagers do.
This is a public policy issue. It is now part of the political sphere of discussion. The initial CNN segment on the Palin pregnancy treats it in the context of Jamie Lynn Spears, "Juno", etc. It is silly to expect liberals not to voice their views on what constitutes a responsible attitude towards teen sexuality when this issue comes up.
This is apart from the far more serious issue of the McCain campaign's evident incompetence and cavalier attitude in nominating and (not) vetting Palin. Or of Palin's irresponsibility in deciding to run for the Vice Presidency when doing so would, first, hurt her daughter, and, second, damage her party and turn the campaign into yet another soap-opera freakshow.
Thanks Megan. This shows how limited the scope of opinion that is tolerated in progressive opinion. Here we have a woman 'breaking the glass ceiling,' but because she hasn't conformed to the reproductive choices of the left and transmitted those to her children she is disqualified. I also find it horribly intrusive that she was assaulted over the truthfulness of her statement that she was raising her Down's syndrome child and that this brought discussion of her daughter whose pregnancy is relevant to rebutting the unevidenced charge that was originally brought. In regard to Obama, Obama's charge that he needed not to take govenrnment funding because he would have to rebut inappropriate private attacks misidentifies where the inappropriate attacks have been coming from.
Jumping on the ticket with a 4 month old baby with Down's Syndrome and a pregnant 17 year old daughter speaks louder than anything anyone can say.
I didn't read this anywhere. I'm not quoting anyone. I'm not making any assumptions about what anyone believes. I'm saying this is a bad move.
I couldn't agree more that the rumor-mongering on this issue was awful, for all the reasons you say. OTOH, I would hardly characterize this as the main thrust of the outpouring of reaction. It seems odd to focus on this one piece of a large and very interesting story.
My real quarrel, though, is the claim that the reaction undermines your support for Obama. Obama himself came out and said this stuff is off limits. He said it as forcefully and clearly as you could possibly ask him to. I dunno. There are a bunch of rightwing nuts who think Obama is a Muslim plant or some such. Should we refuse to vote for McCain because some nuts support him? On that logic, we really can't vote for anyone, can we?
davido- "Not noted in your post is the fact that while she ended up opposing the bridge, she kept the money and used it on other things."
It may surprise you to learn this, but fiscal conservatives aren't opposed to all government spending. We're opposed to wasteful government spending. Now if she ended up spending it on a monument to moosehunting, you may have a point. What did she spend it on?
Teen pregnancy can happen in any family, but it's less likely to happen in families that discuss sex non-judgmentally with their children and teach them how to handle it responsibly and how to use contraceptives.
At the risk of having a substantive discussion in the midst of the drive-by insult fest, can you point to evidence for this assertion?
Just out of curiosity, can you tell me what Vice President Cheney does on a daily basis?
Posted by Clint | September 2, 2008 1:21 PM
Halliburton lobbying, torture, environmental destruction, perjury and something that requires a man-sized safe...
And now Clint, your second question, please....
brooksfoe-
"Teen pregnancy can happen in any family, but it's less likely to happen in families that discuss sex non-judgmentally with their children and teach them how to handle it responsibly and how to use contraceptives. That goes for sexually transmitted diseases as well."
Any reason to think that Todd and Sarah Palin didn't discuss sex non-judgmentally with their children and teach them all those things?
The right-wing position on this isn't that parents shouldn't talk to kids about sex -- it's that teachers shouldn't precisely because parents have a primary responsibility to educate their children about sex.
Get over it! We all make mistakes in our lives but we learn by them. Ask Obama-He said it better, leave the children alone. Give credit where it's deserved, moreover, Sara seems to be a good and decent person and a our future VP. So all you hate mongers-give her a chance. I'm sure John knows what he wants in a VP and she is it. Obama hasn't got the experience she brings to the table-so get over it. Vote for McCain!
Totally separate from any discussion of Palin, I have to inquire further about this statement:
"Because social conservatives are against sex education emphasizing birth control? This would be vastly more compelling if there were any good evidence that sex education emphasizing birth control works any better than sex education emphasizing abstinence. Unfortunately, neither seems to work very well--something that is bizarrely missed by liberals every time a study comes out on the benefits of abstinence-only education. Abstinence-only doesn't reduce teen pregnancies! they trumpet gleefully, somehow failing to notice what this implies about the effectiveness of birth-control education."
Are you sure about that? I grew up in Massachusetts and lived in Texas for about six years of the current decade, and I can tell you for certain that a) Sex Ed is much more progressive in Mass than in Texas and b) the teen pregnancy rate is much lower in Mass than in Texas.
Do you have any evidence for a lack of correlation between progressive sex ed and teen pregnancy rates?
What a nasty piece of work this column is. It's almost too icky to respond to, but I feel compelled to point out that Sarah Palin put her personal ambition before the needs of her daughter who should not have been subject to this amount of public scrutiny. And yes, I think that if Palin was a man I would think the same thing. And I was appalled at her statement: proud? Supportive, loving, yes, but proud? That her 17 year old is going to be married to a self described "f...g redneck" who says he doesn't want kids and is still in highschool? This is what she wants for her daughter? Oh my goodness, I know this has little to do with her qualifications, but it does speak to her priorities and judgement. If you think this reflects American values, you are badly mistaken. Most of us want our children to be educated, have meaningful and productive work and have loving partners. I want way, way more for my children (and my country) than she does.
maximk-
The second question is: Can you really criticize her for wanting to make sure that isn't what she'd be expected to do?
Moving her family to an "undisclosed location" for four years would hardly be a step up from governing Alaska.
(I know, you're not the one who criticized her statement -- and probably wouldn't have -- but that was where the first question was coming from...)
Megan, Here's the one you missed:
Palin is ambitious at the expense of her own family.
"Sarah Palin makes an interesting contrast with Joe Biden, whose first instinct was to resign from the Senate in order to take care of his sons after his wife and daughter were tragically killed. "Delaware can get another senator, but my boys can't get another father."
I will take Biden family values any day of the week.
How can John McCain say with a straight face that he chose the most qualified person to be vice-president? "
Mark,
But he didn't resign, did he?
Julie-
She didn't say she was proud of her daughter for getting pregnant.
She said she was proud of her daughter for choosing to do the right thing when she got pregnant.
Big difference.
What's wrong with the Alaskan Independence Party?
As best as I can tell they are not advocating a violent secession.
From time to time you hear about secession movements in Hawaii, Vermont and other places.
If the people of some state have decided that they no longer want to be part of the union and they can come to some mutually satisfactory agreement with the Feds, what is the problem?
"This contention is wrong. Teen pregnancy can happen in any family, but it's less likely to happen in families that discuss sex non-judgmentally with their children and teach them how to handle it responsibly and how to use contraceptives."
Source? here in France we have explicit sex-ed (education is the same in all of the country, no states) and are 80% atheists, and here's the result:
------------------------
Contraceptive Use
Percentage of adolescent women who did not use any method of birth control at first intercourse*
* Sweden -- 22%
* France -- 11%
* Great Britain -- 21%
* United States -- 25%
( http://www.thebody.com/content/art2418.html )
--------------------------
oh, wow, despite all the sex-ed we have less teens using contraception at first intercourse!
So, what are your sources?
But the people criticizing her are making me considerably less interested in voting for Obama.
OK, don't. Who gives a shit?
What's wrong with the Alaskan Independence Party?
As best as I can tell they are not advocating a violent secession.
From time to time you hear about secession movements in Hawaii, Vermont and other places.
If the people of some state have decided that they no longer want to be part of the union and they can come to some mutually satisfactory agreement with the Feds, what is the problem?
thibaut, your numbers seem to indicate that France has a HIGHER rate of contraceptive use (89%) than other countries, supporting brooksfoe's point.
But the numbers themselves are incomplete; if, say, most of the US women were married at the time of first intercourse, then lack of contraception is less serious than if they are single high-school girls. And of course the rate of teen sex matters too.
Julie-
Second thought: It's definitely going to be hard on Bristol to have to be the subject of so much gossip at this particular point in her life.
How do you think she would have felt if she had to go through this time period feeling responsible for torpedoing her mother's chance to be Vice President?
I don't always say the nicest things about you Megan, but that was an excellent post. Anyone who thinks Sarah Palin's daughter's pregnancy is in anyway relevent to this election is a nutcase.
What is most disgusting about the media is that they refused to cover Edwards' love child as "tabloid trash" but the NYT plastered the front page with stories of a 17 year old who is engaged and pregnant.
I love all the liberals with the "what? us?" responses on here. KOS was all over the Trig rumor and Andrew Sullivan is still demanding that Sarah Palin turn over her medical records to disprove the allegation. I guess we also need to have Obama take a paternity test on his kids. Afterall, we don't know that they are his.
Everytime I think I really have no need to hate liberals, they give me a remind me why I do so much.
If the people of some state have decided that they no longer want to be part of the union and they can come to some mutually satisfactory agreement with the Feds, what is the problem?
Tell that to the sons of the confederates.
Clint,
The Bridge to Nowhere? Troopergate? Buy an 'effin newspaper Clint.
I find it interesting that Instapundit and McCardle are ignoring everything that's come out over the weekend but the kid's kid. The one thing they want off limits is the only thing they're talking about. Interesting.
I was extremely embarrassed by a lot of what's come out from the left in terms of sexism and stupid speculation about the kid not being Palin's. However, I also think it's a function of the fact that the candidate hadn't been vetted. Now she's in the spotlight for the first time.
It's not as if the Right hasn't been willing to smear Obama. If you posted a similar reaction to the Obama Nation book, then I'm sorry I missed it.
When you get up from the fainting couch, please address the other interesting Palin items commenters have mentioned, above. Ostensibly, they are fair game/on the table. If not, why not?
Sarah Palin made three choices:
1. To oppose abortion.
2. To conceive a child at an age when the risk of having a developmentally disabled child was high.
3. To run for vice-president of the United States.
Any two of these choices I can respect but not the three together. As the grandmother of a developmentally disabled child I know too well that it is a full time job to help the child reach his full potential. Every hour of work with a therapist requires three to five hours of reinforcement at home. The job of vice-president is the equivalent of two full time jobs. Is she superwoman?
I consider myself a feminist but once a woman makes the choice to be a mother that becomes her primary job. To do less shows a grave character defect. This is not a person I want as president and considering McCain’s age one must see it as a possibility.
Wow overwhelming disapproval of Sarah Palin on a Democrat blog, how surprising! I'm shocked!
Anyone who thinks Sarah Palin's daughter's pregnancy is in anyway relevent to this election is a nutcase.
What is most disgusting about the media is that they refused to cover Edwards' love child as "tabloid trash"
Aah, delicious irony.
Everytime I think I really have no need to hate liberals, they give me a remind me why I do so much
We welcome your hatred.
MG,
What is wrong with Todd Palin's parenting ability? Or should we simply keep our nation's mother's chained to the children and the stove?
I assume you are similarly outraged by Michelle Obama working. She doesn't have a full time husband at home, hell, a lot of the time he's in another state for his job.
If this is your line of thought, the Obama's don't look very good. Also, I love how everyone compares the VP of one ticket to the Pres of the other, as if those comparisons don't make Obama look small.
"I was extremely embarrassed by a lot of what's come out from the left in terms of sexism and stupid speculation about the kid not being Palin's. However, I also think it's a function of the fact that the candidate hadn't been vetted."
That is such a load of crap. How does this mean she wasn't vetted? So what her kid is preganant? To say she wasn't vetted means there was some deep dark secret no one knew about. That is not the case here. To say that she wasn't "vetted" is to say that McCain should not have chosen her because he should have known that because sexists and old perverts on the left would go after her daughter's sex life. Yeah that makes sense.
>It may surprise you to learn this, but fiscal conservatives aren't opposed to all government spending. We're opposed to wasteful government spending. Now if she ended up spending it on a monument to moosehunting, you may have a point. What did she spend it on?
For one thing, building the Road to the Bridge to Nowhere even after the Bridge to Nowhere itself was cancelled, as I understand it. Nothing wasteful there!
Because all the hyperventilating Obama supporters pretending that they are genuinely morally outraged are willing to say anything to get him elected, even if if means prying into the personal life of a seventeen year old girl who has just been thrust into adulthood in a humiliatingly public way?
Bingo. Obama supporters have endured the last eight years under a president they hate even more than they hate themselves. Now, they have a chance to elect somebody they like, and they ain't too picky about how they go about it. By any means necessary, and all that.
They kinda have to go after Bristol; they must realize the AIP/Troopergate/Bridge to Nowhere stuff either isn't true and/or isn't going to resonate with voters much. Must. Elect. Obama. Nothing else matters.
Jay c:
She's not claiming a lack of correlation - she's arguing for a lack of causation. Massachusetts has a lower teen pregnancy rate for precisely the same reasons to favors education - it's relatively affluent and well educated, and women have many more options in life. Texas has a higher rate, again, for the same reasons it opposes open education - conservative social values, relative poverty, and poor education. And that's actually easy to prove - just compare Lawrence, Mass. (71.7 births per 1,0000 teens) with Texas (63/1000). If progressive education were causative, and not correlative, you'd expect Lawrence to be in line with the rest of Massachusetts, and not worse than Texas.
Sarah Palin made three choices:
1. To oppose abortion.
2. To conceive a child at an age when the risk of having a developmentally disabled child was high.
3. To run for vice-president of the United States.
Any two of these choices I can respect but not the three together. As the grandmother of a developmentally disabled child I know too well that it is a full time job to help the child reach his full potential. Every hour of work with a therapist requires three to five hours of reinforcement at home. The job of vice-president is the equivalent of two full time jobs. Is she superwoman?
I consider myself a feminist but once a woman makes the choice to be a mother that becomes her primary job. To do less shows a grave character defect. This is not a person I want as president and considering McCain’s age one must see it as a possibility.
Megan,
Get a hold of yourself. The 'fake pregnancy' story was an internet sepeculation until it was clearly discredited almost as quickly as it was raised.
But what the hell are you saying? That you'd be ok if a Governor participated in faking a birth certificate if the motivation was to spare her daughter? Come on now, that's not lying about sex or presenting a picture of your family that's been a bit 'airbrushed' but an outright fraud and a crime.
"I consider myself a feminist but once a woman makes the choice to be a mother that becomes her primary job. To do less shows a grave character defect."
So any woman who works a demanding job and also has children has a character defect? So, I guess Hillary, who was a partner in a big law firm when Chelsea was little and "two for one" with her husband in the Whitehouse, had a character defect to? So women have a choice of either never having kids or staying at home. And of course a father can be no help in raising a child. None at all. Only a mother can do that. Come on, that doesn't even pass the laugh test.
First of all, where the hell do you get the idea that the Lewinsky scandal was "not a problem". Were you living under a rock. Second, yes it's a problem that Palin supports absinence only education and yes, the pregnancy of her 17 year old daughter is an indication that it doesn't work. No one's saying that full sex education works all the time. But it is possible that if she'd had better information and access to contraception, we wouldn't be having this debate right now.
To say that she wasn't "vetted" is to say that McCain should not have chosen her because he should have known that because sexists and old perverts on the left would go after her daughter's sex life. Yeah that makes sense.
I don't buy that, John. The news was going to come out one way or another when everyone had to head up to Alaska to learn who Palin is.
I don't see how this detail would have been missed or not reported. I don't think I'm passing judgment on 'a deep dark secret,' given it's something that's happened in my own extended family.
Again, when I see a post here decrying something like the Obama Nation, which is a bestseller, you can get off the high horse.
Apart from Andrew Sullivan, who are the Obama supporters who are going after Bristol Palin?
Name them. Tell me who they are. I'd love to know.
I admit I am a little confused. Your post seems to have concluded that Palin's pregnancy was a sham concocted to hide the pregnancy of her oldest daughter(?).
I was under the impression her daughter was currently pregnant.
Assuming so, how does any of this reflect on Obama? How does her family's business equate to your support of Obama waning?
That is mad. Hear women roar and all of that, but get serious.
Besides, no one asked Palin to accept - none of this would have been news. This is the society we live in. People do things everyday we wouldn't necessarily approve of. Later for Bristol, later for Piper. They have live in this world to and shouldn't be afforded an consideration.
And for the record - Bill Clinton's tryst was a big deal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Megan:
For the love of God, cry me a river.
Your childish whining has grown very tiresome.
Morally speaking, Sarah Palin and Bill Clinton are both trailer park trash. Are you satisfied now?
Sarah Palin has many legitimate strikes against her without the pregnancy issue.
There's troopgate, her link to a pro-Ted Stevens 527 group, her support for intelligent design, her connection to Jack Abramhoff, and her ties to the Alaskan Indep Party. Based on all of these issues, Palin is a disaster and unfit to be VP.
McCain is unfit to be president due to lack of competence and lack of integrity.
Vote for whomever you please. Just stop carrying on like a child about your difficulty deciding who to support.
Nobody cares about your gut wrenching ambivalence.
Your blog has become an exercise in insufferable and unbearable narcissism.
Comprehensive sex education has proven again and again that it is superior to "abstinence only" sex education. See, for example:
http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Feature.showFeature&featureid=1151&pageid=682&parentid=478
And many other resources cited here:
http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageId=682&parentID=478
"And for the record - Bill Clinton's tryst was a big deal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Well yeah, if Palin were giving blowjobs to interns, it would be a big deal just like the Clinton Tryst. But this is her daughter not her. If Chelsea had gotten pregnenent would that have been a big deal? No it wouldn't have.
Because Sarah Palin lied about sex? So let me get this straight. Bill Clinton using a White House intern like a cheap whore in the Oval Office and lying about same under oath: not a problem. Sarah Palin relieving her sixteen year old of the burden of raising a special needs child: a huge character issue. This sounds like a parody of the ridiculous beliefs that social conservatives attribute to liberals.
Megan, I realize you are trying to defend Sarah Palin here, but you are doing it by conceding an absurd smear. It is laughably implausible that Sarah Palin's baby is not her own. No one, except some on the very far left, (along with Andrew Sullivan, who is in his own little world,) has seriously advanced that allegation.
Please add a correction; your post as it stands is extremely unfair, which is ironic, since that is clearly the opposite of your intention.
Jesus Tapdancing Christ what the hell is wrong with you JK. Palin is white trash because her daughter got pregnant? That is the same as Bill Clinton banging interns and sexually harrassing state employees. You are a disgusting troll.
Like I said above, anyone who thinks this is relevent is a nutcase.
SP,
Where has anyone said abstinence only education prevented ALL unwanted pregnancies? That's the only position this proves 'doesn't work'
Yes, you folks would still call her a bad mother, you need to.
Listen, Sarah Palin is pro-contraception and for all we know (and this is a sticking point) she discussed the role of sex in a relationship, accessibility of condoms and other birth control with Bristol well before she became sexually active. Even with all of that, she was a kid and got pregnant. Not the first, not the last, but made a decision consistent with her beliefs though it was hard and would have consequences.
You don't know what went on at home, you don't know Bristol's beliefs, you don't know the whether the facts support the case you're pushing. You're speculating for political gain, and passing it of as criticism.
If Chelsea had gotten pregnenent would that have been a big deal? No it wouldn't have.
What???
I don't recall anyone saying those things. I do recall people being startled that there are an entire host of things coming out about Palin that are far more troubling, including her thirst for earmarks, while claiming she hates them with every fiber of her being. What comes out is an impression of a person who says one thing, but has and presumably will do exactly the opposite. Kind of like George W Bush placing his hand on his heart and pledging to bring "honor" back to the White House. Which would you rather have Megan, a tawdry sexual fling with an intern or the shame of our torture and killing of those in our custody? Take your time. I know that balancing the importance of things of such scale may be hard for you.
What it mostly does is reinforce the widespread perception that John McCain is a loose cannon, willing to do something for effect, rather than with the best interests of our nation in mind. He is welcome to be a "maverick" or prankster on his own time, but the world is in too much of a mess for us to afford McCain or Palin to take a lighthearted stab at that pesky governing thingie. It would be funny, were it not so serious.
Palin eloped with her high-school boyfriend, Todd Palin, on August 29, 1988, when she was 24 years old.[7] According to her mother, the reason was simple: "It was a shock but she did it because she knew we couldn’t afford a big white wedding."[131] Their first son, Track, was born EIGHT months after their wedding.[
Palin eloped with her high-school boyfriend, Todd Palin, on August 29, 1988, when she was 24 years old.[7] According to her mother, the reason was simple: "It was a shock but she did it because she knew we couldn’t afford a big white wedding."[131] Their first son, Track, was born EIGHT months after their wedding.[
I heard Barack Obama say that the pregnancy is not relevant, so why would anyone ne less likely to vote for him? Has anyone from his campaign said anything offensive? Not that I know of.
Republicans are simultaneously (1) appalled that the media brings it up, (2) saying she is a role model for working class families, and (3) trying to say that this "decision to keep the baby" shows good "pro-life values." (Of course, the idea of a "pro-life choice" is oxymoronic because pro-life means no choice.)
The only question I have relating to "bad mother" is whether Palin knew what the scrutiny would be like, and/or whether McCain and his staff gave her any indication.
Eliot-
I draw your attention back to the distinction between allegation and conviction.
I asked if there's any evidence of any actual abuse of power, not if she's ever been accused of it.
Whoa, I actually missed the part of Megan's post on first read where she says there's no evidence that comprehensive sex ed reduces pregnancy rates.
That's false. It's simply false. If you're someone who believes in the validity of scientific research, please don't say that.
http://www.siecus.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Feature.showFeature&featureid=1151&pageid=682&parentid=478
"Comprehensive Programs:
· Two-thirds of comprehensive programs had positive sexual behavioral effects.
· 40% of comprehensive programs delayed the initiation of sex, reduced the number of partners, and increased condom or contraceptive use.
· Nearly 30% of comprehensive programs reduced the frequency of sex.
· More than 60% reduced incidence of unprotected sex.
· 40% of the programs had a positive effect on more than one sexual behavior.
Palin eloped with her high-school boyfriend, Todd Palin, on August 29, 1988, when she was 24 years old.[7] According to her mother, the reason was simple: "It was a shock but she did it because she knew we couldn’t afford a big white wedding."[131] Their first son, Track, was born EIGHT months after their wedding.[
We all know Palin can run things while raising a family. We have seen her do it as we find out new astonishing things about her each day. And how many women are out there now doing this! Stop down playing a womans abilities. We have boot straps way longer then a mans...
And listen who's to say that Palin's daughter isn't deeply in love with the young man that got her pregnant and will have a long lasting marraige? And will continue to finish her education and be the president one day! How many marraiges are out there today with the same story and as a result of keeping their babies and marrying the person have created a generation of educated and happy people? My grandmother started having kids at age 14 because it was acceptable in her time and as a result my mother was born and so was I. Let it go people. Not an issue for being competent to lead. Her life already shows leadership in the circumstances that come her way. She just goes forward with what comes her way and God will give her the strength to continue.
She has more experience then Obama and Biden put togther so now you have to try to find some weak hole and dig it deeper. That's alright women have been dealing with these issues since the beginning of time and she is breaking the glass ceiling off all ya all's opinions! You go girl !
I wonder if JK is Jim Keane. The invective is slightly more restrained, but the tone is very similar.
Here's more, from a U. of Washington study:
"Researchers at the University of Washington set out to compare the sexual health risk of adolescents who have received various types of sexuality education....This study used data collected in 2002–03 through the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG), a nationwide survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Center for Health Statistics...
# Abstinence-only programs were not significantly associated with a risk reduction for teen pregnancy when compared with no sex education.
# In comparing abstinence-only programs with comprehensive sex education, comprehensive sex education was associated with a 50% lower risk of teen pregnancy.
Palin once spoke at a secessionist convention. That is a big deal. Being friends with and having fund raisers with unrepentant terrorists is no big deal. Going to a black supremacist America and Jew baiting church is no big deal either. Getting a home loan from a convicted felon and mobster is no big deal either. Your daughter gets knocked up from her b/f, you are clearly a terrible American and bad mother an unfit for office.
Of course, when Al Gore's son got busted for pot, we didn't have a national discussion on the need to talk about drugs with your kids. When Jesse and John Edwards knocked up their mistresses we never talked about sex ed. Of course John Edwards, a one term Senator, whose only claim to fame was channeling the voices of dead babies to gullible juries was so over qualified to be a VP pick. You people disgust me.
How about this: because Sarah Palin (I suspect) still would not agree with you in saying that abstinence-only sex education doesn't seem to work very well. Anyway, here in Europe we do a lot of sex education, and we actually seem to get less teen pregnancies as a result.
Seems like John Edwards, while running for the Democratic presidential nomination, and fathering a baby while having an extramarital affair against his cancer-stricken wife, is a much bigger deal than an Alaskan teenager getting pregnant.
How "earnest" was John Edwards? What does this say about the Democrat's vetting process?
BTW, Obama was the product of a teeage pregnancy. The liberals had better tiptoe around this one carefully.
How about this: because Sarah Palin (I suspect) still would not agree with you in saying that abstinence-only sex education doesn't seem to work very well. Anyway, here in Europe we do a lot of sex education, and we actually seem to get less teen pregnancies as a result.
And Rob, the system ate my earlier post on this, but this from the Alan Guttmacher Institute answers some of your queries on cross-country sexual activity rates. It's from 2001 but their more recent data from 2007 isn't much different except that US rates of teen pregnancy have started to rise, not fall, since 2002:
----
• Levels of sexual activity and the age at which teenagers become sexually active do not vary considerably across comparable developed countries, such as Canada, Great Britain, France, Sweden and the United States.
• Teenagers in the United States are more likely to have sexual intercourse before age 15 and have shorter and more sporadic sexual relationships than teenagers in Canada, France, Great Britain and Sweden. As a result, they are more likely to have more than one partner in a given year.
CONTRACEPTIVE USE
• The primary reasons why U.S. teenagers have the highest rates of pregnancy, childbearing and abortion among developed countries is less overall contraceptive use and less use of the pill or other long-acting reversible hormonal methods, which have the highest use-effectiveness rates.
• Factors in cross-country differences in teenagers' contraceptive use include negative societal attitudes toward teenage sexual relationships, restricted access to and high costs of reproductive health services, ambivalence toward contraceptive methods and lack of motivation to delay motherhood or to avoid unintended pregnancy.
TEENAGE PREGNANCY
.....
• Adolescent pregnancy rates vary across developed countries, from a very low rate in the Netherlands (12 pregnancies per 1,000 women aged 15-19 per year) to a very high rate in the Russian Federation (102 per 1,000).
• Japan and most western European countries have low pregnancy rates (less than 40 per 1,000).
• Australia, Canada and New Zealand and a number of European countries have moderate pregnancy rates (40-69 per 1,000).
• Five countries have teenage pregnancy rates of 70 or more per 1,000 per year—Belarus, Bulgaria, Romania, the Russian Federation and the United States.
Thanks, Cynic. I'll have to chew on that.
You have an opinion about HPV, but not about VP? Really?
You have an opinion on the reaction to the pick, but nothing to say about the pick itself?
I don't get it. Surely you're interested in where Palin stands on any number of the issues you're so well-versed in.
Let me join the other commenters in sayings "what?"
Of course, it's none of our business. And the left-wing blogs I read have taken that position. Instead the vast majority of the criticism has been over perfectly legitimate issues - the ongoing corruption inquiry, her false claims to be anti-pork, her lack of expressed opinions on critical national issues ...
If Megan has no particular opinion about Governor Palin at this point and thinks the world is aflame with (helpfully unlinked) criticism of her daughter, she needs to read better new sources.
Tom
That Ms. Palin chose to accept the vice presidential nomination, knowing full well that her daughter would be held up to the world’s moral judgment, and to be painted as an unwed teen pregnancy, shows Palin’s true character. Her ambition and opportunism outweigh family values by a long stretch (mark).
Clint,
You asked for some of the lies Palin has told, not about allegations of abuse of power (lame attempt to change the question). The Bridge to Nowhere and Troopergate are both situations where she has been caught in lies. She was NOT against the Bridge to Nowhere. And she WAS involved in Troopergate. These are easily verifiable facts at this point.
This is my last comment. I will not waste any more time with you.
Listen, Sarah Palin is pro-contraception
Hm, looks like that's true -- I'd seen reports she opposed contraception even for married couples, but that seems not to be the case. So the issue comes down to one of public policy, abstinence-only vs. comprehensive sex ed.
It's a big deal if Trig is Bristol's baby because anyone going to such great lengths to cover-up a teen pregnancy is a clear proponent of the edifice of shame built around teen sexuality in the US. I think if we trust 16 year olds to accelerate themselves and their friends to 70 mph on the highways, those 16 year olds should be given purview over their penises and vaginas.
Getting pregnant at 17 is embarrassing because contraception is ubiquitous and failing to use it is a dumbshit thing to do. But I don't think that's the variety of shame the Palins sought to avoid in attempting the switcheroo (if they did).
"This sounds like a parody of the ridiculous beliefs that social conservatives attribute to liberals."
Social conservatives believe in privacy when their private actions, if subject to public scrutiny, would reveal a fair degree of hypocrisy in their claims of moral superiority and their disdainful rejection of "liberal" lifestyles.
Social conservatives do not believe in privacy, however, when liberals' (by which I mean people who believe it is not inappropriate to pursue a nuanced analysis of social conduct) private conduct does not conform to the ethical code that social conservatives preach, but apparently do not universally keep.
I think you and the Palin's are taking refuge in what Bourdieu would describe as the "well meaning rule-breakers" license to defy the social norms they would impose on others as long as they say they feel bad about the breach after the fact.
Your indignation is both convenient, and full of shit. White sepulchres, baby. I here Sam Brownback talking about the domestic turmoil chez Palin and all I can think is whited sepulchres.
And can I just say, y'all would do your cause a lot more good if you'd let Clinton's penis go. It's kind of disturbing watching you folks cling to this obsession as you age.
Seems to me Clinton was impeached.
Why do Conservatives always play the "it was ok when Clinton did it!" card?!
It wasn't ok- you tried to take down the government over it!
I'm glad family values are such something you folks preach to the rest of us but don't actually have to live by.
Words not deeds.
Lynne Spears for VP!
Brooksfoe, a fact sheet from a group that lobbies to spread its education programs is not data.
The recent studies that have come out comparing abstinence-only programs to comprehensive programs have shown little statistically significant difference between them. Abstinence education doesn't work, and neither does education about birth control. Which is not surprising, because condoms are really easy to buy, and everyone knows what they're for.
Moreover, if you go to a school in a high-risk district--rural or inner city--and check out what the kids are retaining from, say, algebra class, you won't be very surprised that sex ed doesn't do much good, either. Indeed, handing the stuff out for free in high schools is shockingly ineffective.
The difference in birth rates between states seems to have more to do with demographics, income, and abortion rates, than with sex ed. The south has high birth rates, higher rates of teen marriage, and lower abortion rates; the north has the reverse.
As you know, international comparisons are often very difficult to make. The fact that the Netherlands has low rates of teenaged pregnancy does not mean that we would have similarly low rates if we introduced their sex ed programs. Culture matters. Unless you have some secret plan to make us all actually be Dutch, all you know is that Dutch people have low rates of teen pregnancy.
I don't see any "liberals" making an issue of this. Obama has firmly distanced himself. Smells more like a frustrated conservative blogger grasping at straws... Weak candidates, no diplomatic experience (no, sorry, war is not diplomacy), the far right wackos already suspect McCain... That's the side from which the flack will come over this non-issue. Sorry Megan, we're not buying.
What exactly did Palin do Hugh? This is her daughter not her. Was Clinton impeached over the actions of his kids? I didn't think so.
Megan,
It seems a bit ridiculous that you're allowing this conspiracy theory non-sense to affect your decision on who to vote for.
Obama himself roundly condemned the coverage and the theorists, which seems to me more of a reason to support him (as he seems more concerned with substantive issues than this non-sense) than an indictment on the candidate himself.
Could you please explain the logic of how looking at someone's supporters is somehow more indicative of that person's character than the person himself?
Don't get me wrong, there's plenty to ridicule here, from the left-wing "OMG MORAL SCANDAL!" crowd to the right-wing suddenly holding Palin's family life as some paragon of moral values. But either way we cut it, the only thing we should be making judgments on should be on their policy issues.
So again, why are supporters of candidate x or candidate y more indicative of your belief in supporting them than their actual policy positions?
"I don't see any "liberals" making an issue of this"
Just KOS, Sullivan and like four stories on the front page of the NYT. I guess the Times is in the tank for the family values, scrlett letter crown. Edwards, an actual candidate, having a mistress was "tabloid trash not worthy of covering", but the sex life of a 17 year old is worth multiple front page stories. The liberals never pushed this story at all.
I can't believe how many people are ready to just axe this woman before she even gets going... is she really that scary to everyone? Finally had to write my own blog post about her just to counter act the smear campaign everyone seems interested in participating against her.
http://d.amasc.us/2008/09/02/sarah-palin-smear-campaign/
She deserves the same chance everyone gets and shouldn't be smeared with statements that are not facts (IMO).
Yeah, and how did Sen. Biden's time off from Washington work out? Wait, you mean he didn't actually stay home with his family, but continued to hold office? Why, he must be some evil monster, unfit to be VP of the US.
What precisely is your definition of upper-middle-class? I don't think the moose-hunting, hockey-mom wife of an oil-field worker quite qualifies. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
You know, the thing is, on EVERY SINGLE BLOG I read, whether this one or Marginal Revolution or Steve Sailer or Half Sigma, a post on Sarah Palin elicits huge numbers of comments. Very interesting.
The pregnancy of Governor Palin's daughter is neither here nor there. If the presumptive VP candidate is going to be criticized and or dumped from the ticket, it should be for her decisions, ie politically. Troopergate and other issues remain to be resolved.
Blue,
I have never seen anything like this. Althouse in on like post 14 each with over 200 comments. It is crazy. This woman has illicited an enormous response. It is really amazing.
On the bridge to nowhere:
Of course she supported it. Every governor supports getting every federal dollar they can. What's remarkable is that she responded to criticism of it and opposed it.
Consider that neither of Alaska's Senators or their Rep. opposed it. In fact they increased their support in face of criticism. Also consider that supporting the bridge would not have been an unpopular position in Alaska.
Find me one other governor that opposed a significant federal earmark for their state.
The recent studies that have come out comparing abstinence-only programs to comprehensive programs have shown little statistically significant difference between them. - MM
Perhaps you could provide some examples of such studies. As far as I know, the University of Washington is not a "group that lobbies to spread its own educational policies", and the Alan Guttmacher Institute is the best respected American organization for the gathering of information on reproductive health policy. The fact that kids in bad schools don't retain information about algebra either is not a good argument, but rather a poor argument, for the ineffectiveness of sex ed programs in such settings.
Teen pregnancy rates dropped through 2001 in every advanced democracy including the US. After 2002 they started to rise. Do you have an explanation for this phenomenon? Might it be connected to the fact that the proportion of American teens exposed to abstinence-only sex ed tripled from 2002 to 2005?
Interesting that Megan commented on Brooksfoe's comment but ignored my links to several peer-reviewed studies showing the efficacy of comprehensive sex education.
Oh well, so much for trying to add something substantive to the discussion. I guess Atlantic bloggers like Megan would rather stick to superficial, preformed opinions than grapple with actual data on the topic.
Let me get this straight. Basically everyone is saying this is a non-issue, which it isn't, however we should take a look at all the other so-called issues of Sarah Palin. Most of what you hear, (i.e. She is part of AIP and other conspiracies) are just that, conspiracies. Let's see how Obama supporters like that of the same. I think Obama's camp put out all these conspiracies, like the downs baby isn't truly Mrs. Palin's, because he was feeling the pressure that McCain is truly the right person for the job. And then came out and informed people to not attack the family members of candidates to look good. Give me a break. That isn't true and none of these other conspiracies against Sarah Palin are either. Please, let's get back to the policies of each candidate and make that the basis of your support.
Let me get this straight. Basically everyone is saying this is a non-issue, which it isn't, however we should take a look at all the other so-called issues of Sarah Palin. Most of what you hear, (i.e. She is part of AIP and other conspiracies) are just that, conspiracies. Let's see how Obama supporters like that of the same. I think Obama's camp put out all these conspiracies, like the downs baby isn't truly Mrs. Palin's, because he was feeling the pressure that McCain is truly the right person for the job. And then came out and informed people to not attack the family members of candidates to look good. Give me a break. That isn't true and none of these other conspiracies against Sarah Palin are either. Please, let's get back to the policies of each candidate and make that the basis of your support.
Sarah Palin made three choices:
1. To oppose abortion.
2. To conceive a child at an age when the risk of having a developmentally disabled child was high.
3. To run for vice-president of the United States.
Any two of these choices I can respect but not the three together. As the grandmother of a developmentally disabled child I know too well that it is a full time job to help the child reach his full potential. Every hour of work with a therapist requires three to five hours of reinforcement at home. The job of vice-president is the equivalent of two full time jobs. Is she superwoman?
I consider myself a feminist but once a woman makes the choice to be a mother that becomes her primary job. To do less shows a grave character defect. This is not a person I want as president and considering McCain’s age one must see it as a possibility.
Megan,
I was waiting to get your reaction to Palin. Needless to say, I am disappointed.
Where is the beef? You go on and on (rightfully I might add) about how people should be focused on the real issues and not the distractions permeating Palin. Where is your vibrosity where it concerns Palin's policies? This is, as you point out, where we should be focused.
Do you agree with Palin or not? Do you think she is qualified or not? Its too easy, given the circumstances, to simply say I do not have an opinion. Especially, after disparaging everyone else for their concerns or opinions (at length I might add).
I suspect your lack of substance is due to the fact there is no substance to discuss where it concerns Palin. Unqualifed and extreme/fringe is my take on Palin. What is yours?
Culture matters. Unless you have some secret plan to make us all actually be Dutch, all you know is that Dutch people have low rates of teen pregnancy.
No. I know that Dutch, Canadian, British, French, German and Japanese people have low rates of teen pregnancy. Sexual activity in all these countries is basically the same as in the US. Perhaps there is some magic cultural anti-pregnancy quality that Dutch, Canadian, British, French, German and Japanese people have in common?
Or perhaps a key difference is that every one of those countries has extensive public comprehensive sex-ed programs, which the US has never matched? To say the US is "culturally different" really begs the question; what I'm saying is precisely that the culture Sarah Palin embraces leads to higher rates of teen pregnancy.
Your comment that "everyone knows what condoms are for" misses several points at once. The first is that condoms are not the most effective method of birth control; long-lasting contraceptives like Depovera are best, the pill is second best, condoms are third. Europeans are more likely to use the long-lasting methods and that accounts for most of their better performance, and most of the reduction in teen pregnancy in the US to 2001 was attributable to rising rates of long-lasting contraception, which have since declined.
Second, it is not true that everyone knows condoms prevent pregnancy. The US government has devoted billions of dollars over the past 7 years to teaching American teenagers that condoms are not effective at preventing pregnancy or STIs. Look it up.
Third, sex ed programs do not aim simply to provide people with information. They aim to change behavior. It's true that health programs that just give people information are not always effective at changing behavior, which is why public health organizations in the past 10 years have moved past "Information, Education and Communication" strategies to "Behavior Change Communication" strategies.
Finally, I didn't raise any comparison of rates between states.
John,
Andrew Sullivan is not a left-winger, and while he (mistakenly) posted her family, the bulk of his posts have been about serious issues. I have two stories on the front page of my New York Times. The main article is about the apparent failure of John McCain to vet with his VP choice - that is a serious issue. A second article discussed mothers' reactions to a mother of a young child running. Which of those buttress Megan's point?
I don't regularly read the Daily Kos so I can not comment on that. Is that the best you've got?
best,
Tom
There are 3 issues:
1) Patronizing women by assuming one vagina is as good as any other. There are many women in the Republican party who are far more qualified than Palin. Of course, they don't have Ms Alaska runner-up looks, which is a fetish of McCain's (discarded 1st wife, Cindy, and now Palin)
2) Patronizing Clinton supporters. Google Palin and Clinton, see how glowing Palin was about Clinton before she gushed on Friday.
Palin calls Clinton a whiner:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA15XU23kEc&NR=1
3) This selection says tons about McCain's judgment. With good judgment, you can intelligently pick experts and cabinet members willing to be honest with you, and come to a good decision - without good judgment, well, you'd be John McCain
RobB,
Three points - I would guess plenty of governors would oppose specific earmarks, as long as they got to redirect the money. Or am I mistaken and she returned the money?
Second, Governor Palin being better than average on earmarks is one of the precious few justifications for her selection. If you are reduced to arguing she is cosmetically better than Alaska's senators, you're not in a good spot.
Finally, as a mayor, she was apparently very effective at getting federal money after she hired a lobbying firm for her town. See this Post article.
best,
Tom
Sullivan is a complete left winger and totally in the tank for Obama. If Obama supporters want to throw him over the side and stop taking him seriously because of his disgusting comments, good for you. You should. He is a terrible human being. Same goes for KOS. Are you going to throw that bum out to? I hope so.
The NYT story on "vetting" is a BS nonstory and a backdoor way to slime Palin. How does her daughter being pregnant show a lack of vetting? It is only a lack of vetting if you think it is somehow relevent, which all of the liberals on here are claiming it is not. Since it is not relevent, she was vetted. To say otherwise is just to drag sleaze. Was Edwards not properly vetted because he had a mistress on the side? I don't recall ever seeing that story when the NYT and the MSM were refusing to cover the story. Now vetting is so important. BS. IT is a total double standard and the media is really disgusting on this issue.
The issue is not Sarah Palin as a mother, but as a VP who could step in as President tomorrow.
The issues is also John McCain's judgement. The SP seems to be that he chose Palin to spite Rove who would not let him have his Lieberman. Rove wanted Romney and threatened a convention revolt.
That sound Presidential to you?
McCain just seems to have fulfilled the negative stereotype of himself as rash and erratic. How much vetting did Sarah Palin get? Why are they so badly prepared for this?
This is an awful contrast with Obama's measured and systematic elimation of possibilities until Biden was left. And how "right" Biden is.
The back and forth between Megan and Brooksfoe is particularly illustrative of what is wrong with Megan's writing and arguing in general. Brooksfoe links to studies showing a link between sex education and lower teen pregnancy rates. Megan responds thusly:
If you are going to make the assertion, do you think you could LINK TO THE DAMN STUDIES! I don't know how many times you've said something like, "Studies show..." and then been completely unable to produce such studies. But you are perfectly able to produce half-baked handwaving like "Everyone knows how to use condoms, so, uh... QED."
Bristol Palin's pregnancy is relevant because it shows that Sarah Palin's judgment is seriously flawed. Think about it: if you knew your 17-year-old unwed daughter was pregnant, would you choose that moment to shove your family into the glare of national politics? Or would you decide to sit this one out, thereby protecting your daughter from the inevitable gossip and publicity? Just asking....
"Sarah Palin relieving her sixteen year old of the burden of raising a special needs child ... I'd think it's rather more admirable to take on a special needs baby that you didn't give birth to."
Wait, are you asserting that Palin isn't the mother of Trig? Is there some bit of news I've missed or are you one of the conspiracy theorists now?
If you're using these as a hypothetical on why it wouldn't be a big deal /even if/ she wasn't Trig's mother it's not made very clear...
I would think that it speaks well of Obama that he declared this off limits. I would think that would at least overcome your doubts brought about by his supposedly crazy supporters. He stood up to his crazy supporters and did the right thing. Also I think most critics of Palin are more focused on her crazy political views ei. Alaska should become its own country. That said if you are in a non swing state then you should go to the polls and vote for other. This will indicate your political engagement without supporting Obama's agenda which you don't like. If you are in a swing state then you should vote for Obama or McCain because one of them will be president and you have a responsibility to use your power to make sure we get the better one.
Megan wrote:
He, he, he- my time has come.
In the last five days, Sarah Palin has probably undergone more “vetting” than Barack Obama has in the last five years.
And on this:
But the people criticizing her are making me considerably less interested in voting for Obama. If this sort of deranged logic produces unwavering support for Obama, I have to question my own judgement.
I think you should vote for the candidate whose professed policies best accord with your own convictions, whose character and judgment you think seem best suited to the presidency, who seems to bring along the most respectable crew of advisers and future appointees, and perhaps who you think has a reasonable chance of being elected, though I can understand why some people choose not to consider this last issue.
Eliot-
Sorry. Honest mistake. I asked both questions in the posts above your response.
If you'd written, "She lied about Troopergate." rather than just "The Bridge to Nowhere? Troopergate? Buy an 'effin newspaper Clint." then perhaps I would have been able to more easily follow your line of reasoning.
I honestly haven't been following "Troopergate" that closely --- so I've just read the Wikipedia entry. (I know, I know... but it's a reasonable starting place...)
It does sound like her "initial statements" were at least false, and possibly lies -- though it depends a bit on what precisely she said, which isn't quoted in the Washington Post article the Wiki entry links to.
It's not a great sign -- but I'm not entirely persuaded yet.
Don't let the bloggers sour you on Obama! He's not criticizing Palin or attacking her for her daughter's indiscretions. He doesn't care either.
But one point of disagreement - this is news, and it is terribly interesting news. I mean terrible.
Its interesting because it involves high schoolers having sex, and attractive middle aged moms having sex, just pick your internet porn site cliche. It is not substantive news, and the people who try to say it is are dimwits. But it is the stuff from which the National Enquirer has mined a fortune - the same reason that Edwards's affair was news. The National Enquirer is a very successful operation, so expect the coverage to continue.
I can see two actions by Obama and Biden: either not raising the issue or saying congratulations. Not that I expect them to do the latter, but it keeps them from being associated with some of their supporters who happen to have some "creative" ideas. I am sure (At least I hope) that this affair would be forgotten. Obama-Biden have better things to worry about.
blah blah blah, so what about Trig or the Pregnant Teen. just because some people focus on those aspects doesn't mean there aren't other more compelling reasons to question the wisdom and judgment of the pick.
Trooper-gate comes to mind, how a penchant for lying about a sales tax hike, or lying about being against the bridge to nowhere, or that rather than saving the money... the funds were simply diverted into other projects, or a willingness to teach creationism in a science class, or a stunning ignorance on the history of the pledge of alliegiance and 'under god', or... I mean, really, this is just the tip of the Iceberg.
So, sure there are a few people who are making stupid points about Palin and her daughter and babies. but if you think the Democrats are behaving poorly, Do a mild mental exercise and imagine the reaction of the Republican party and their supporters if Obama had a teenaged daughter who'd gotten knocked up and wasn't married. Throw outrage if you want, but I think the noise you'd get would be deafening. Really, the Democrats are barely a murmur on the whole subject.
John,
What does left-winger mean to you? Someone who dislikes Bush? Andrew Sullivan is an advocate for small government, and recently wrote a book about taking back the conservative soul.
Your comment about the New York Times article is even more odd - did you bother to read it? The article produces plenty of evidence that she was not thoroughly vetted For example, the team that was assigned to vet Palin only arrived in Alaska on Thursday. They quote a Republican close to the campaign as saying that Palin only began to be seriously considered four or five days before the announcement. They quote multiple relevant Alaska Republicans who said they knew of nobody asking any questions. Are you arguing that she was well-vetted?
Tom
a post on Sarah Palin elicits huge numbers of comments. Very interesting.
Why wouldn't it? McCain sure made history - by choosing the least qualified VP candidate in modern times.
That's a pretty significant event. Only natural that it would provoke discussion.
Jesus Christ, you really are an embarrassment.
And I quote:
"But the people criticizing her are making me considerably less interested in voting for Obama. If this sort of deranged logic produces unwavering support for Obama, I have to question my own judgement."
I'm not even going to try to break this abortion down. Please stop blogging.
Jesus Christ, you really are an embarrassment.
And I quote:
"But the people criticizing her are making me considerably less interested in voting for Obama. If this sort of deranged logic produces unwavering support for Obama, I have to question my own judgement."
I'm not even going to try to break this abortion down. Please stop blogging.
MG: "I consider myself a feminist but once a woman makes the choice to be a mother that becomes her primary job. To do less shows a grave character defect."
Seriously?
I'm pretty sure you can't be a feminist and claim that women have the sole responsibility to stay home and raise the children while their husband goes off to work to support the family.
That's also a pretty low view you have of men, there. Todd Palin is a stay-at-home dad -- taking care of the kids is his primary job. In what way is he inadequate to the task?
Ah, excellent: I see the cud-chewing retards will once again be deciding the election. Only this time, McCain will win because the "LIE-beral Dhimmicraps" were mean to Sarah Palin. Of course, the most important issue of this election is punishing the handful of C-list bloggers who might be writing about this...
What petulant children American "centrists" are...
Thanks, brooksfoe. Signal to noise here is dropping too fast to make further discussion worthwhile. I'd like to probe the numbers further in a different thread if one comes up.
MG: "I consider myself a feminist but once a woman makes the choice to be a mother that becomes her primary job. To do less shows a grave character defect."
Seriously?
I'm pretty sure you can't be a feminist and claim that women have the sole responsibility to stay home and raise the children while their husband goes off to work to support the family.
That's also a pretty low view you have of men, there. Todd Palin is a stay-at-home dad -- taking care of the kids is his primary job. In what way is he inadequate to the task?
Megan doesn't seem to have the remotest of clues as to how this story developed over the last 36 hours. She didn't see fit to post on anything since she panned Obama's speech, and now this completely fictional account of the Palin family drama and its media history.
Megan, if you choose not to pay close attention to this race for president, Jesus, how could anyone blame you? But then couldn't you spare us your uniformed ranting when the inanity pierces your mental cocoon? The Repubs took over and inanity ensued: shock! Well, it may be be inane, but it's still mighty important. So please try to get some facts before posting. I can't believe that you need to be told that, but you do.
There are people who actually wade through this crap trying to keep things straight who would gladly take your enviable, well-paid (relatively, I think?), new-crossed-with-old-media blogging position. I think you take your position and the small but not insignificant modicum of influence that comes with it for granted at times.
"by choosing the least qualified VP candidate in modern times."
Less qualified than John Edwards? Edwards was a one term Senator who was about to lose his bid for re-election. He had never been anything other than a shyster lawyer. But no one said anything about "experience" with him. He was a man and a Democrat.
Ya heard it here first!
The day after Obama beats McCain
1) Bristol Palin will hold her wedding ceremony at the White House
2) Sarah Palin will announce that she's joining the Not Ready for Primetime Players on SNL
I have one question about the hypothesis that the Down's Syndrome baby isn't Sarah's but is Bristol's.
Isn't Down's Syndrome largely a problem with older mothers? I mean, say, 44 years old; not 17 years old.
-dk
Edwards was a one term Senator who was about to lose his bid for re-election.
Hey, at least he made it almost to the end of his term before running, unlike some nominees for President.
I don't know how this is going to work out for Obama, but I do find myself identifying with him. 'What a distraction!' as he says. I also see some of the pressures to conform, as a minority, thus 'progressive' entitled candidate, to conform to 'progressive' views.
The day after Obama beats McCain
1) Bristol Palin will hold her wedding ceremony at the White House
2) Sarah Palin will announce that she's joining the Not Ready for Primetime Players on SNL
And within a month of Obama's innaguration Ayers and Bernadine Dorn will spend the night in the Lincoln Bedroom. When people complain it will be "that is old news, we had an election and the people said it didn't matter".
More people have brought up her alleged membership or involvement with the Alaskan Independence Party. Again I ask what is wrong with advocating peaceful secession.
I have no problem if Alaska (or Hawaii, or Vermont or some other state or territory) wants to leave the union as part of a mutually agreed upon framework approved by the federal gov't.
And for their next trick, the Democrats are planning a ban on apple pie and its supporters.
Sarah Palin has and does advocate for eliminating sex education classes and replacing them with abstinence only programs. That her daughter is pregnant only matters in that it provides a stark contrast to the actualities of sex and the ignorance promoted by people like Palin. It's disturbing that people like yourself are giving her a free pass over the obvious wrongheadedness of her positions but it isn't surprising given your own ignorance about the differences in effectiveness between abstinence programs and real sex education programs, not necessarily in preventing sex but teaching kids how to use proper protection so they don't, you know, have their lives permanently changed by getting pregnant at 17.
Tearing Palin down using her daughter is shameful. Equally shameful are the people ignoring her ignorant and harmful advocation of abstinence programs and the lives ruined thereby.
Remember those thrilling days of yesteryear when the Republican Party went batshit about the unwed pregnancy of Murphy Brown, a fictional television character?
Of course you don't, Megan.
http://tinyurl.com/murphybrown
This was an ill-advised post. As was the post reacting to Obama's speech, which can be criticized from a policy perspective, but not from the standpoint of presentation or politics.
People want to believe Obama; the country wants someone they can fall in love with. It's not his liberal politics getting in the way of a clear win, it's his novelty along with the GOP fear-mongering.
Despite his liberal politics, as a person Obama is the most stable, centered, normal person to run for President in a long time. Once people tune in and figure that out, they will be able to vote for change.
Just like 1980 . . .
Tuning Obama out as Democratic "boilerplate," and then projecting onto Obama your anger at the *media* reaction to Sarah Palin -- you're in danger of losing your pundit stripes.
Someone on the internet criticized Sarah Palin, how can I possibly vote for Obama now?
"But the people criticizing her are making me considerably less interested in voting for Obama. If this sort of deranged logic produces unwavering support for Obama, I have to question my own judgement."
Megan,
who are these people who have leveled the italicized malodorous accusations? What is their level of importance in the Obama campaign organization (or to which blogs/publications do they belong)?
Has it come this?
How about lives ruined by not being able to spell 'l-i-b-r-a-r-y?' Along the lines of, as the Animals sang, 'Mothers tell your children,' see also 'surgical anatomy' textbook, cf. HPV post above.
Next time you're trying to find an excuse for why people don't like your work and want you fired, Megan, think of this post.
And your vagina has nothing to do with it.
None of us Obama supporters have anything to say about Bristol Palin's pregnancy. We're just eating popcorn and watching the show.
So let me get this straight. Bill Clinton using a White House intern like a cheap whore
"BUT BILL CLINTON!" is available elsewhere at discount prices. Take note, Atlantic editors!
MG wrote:
“… once a woman makes the choice to be a mother that becomes her primary job. To do less shows a grave character defect.”
I’m curious, MG, whether the same applies to fathers? If not, why? And if so, wouldn’t both parents' avoidance of "character defect" missteps make providing for the family pretty difficult?
Barack Obama:
I have heard some of the news on this and so let me be as clear as possible. I have said before and I will repeat again, I think people's families are off limits, and people's children are especially off limits. This shouldn't be part of our politics, it has no relevance to governor Palin's performance as a governor or her potential performance as a vice president. And so I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories. You know my mother had me when she was 18. And how family deals with issues and teenage children that shouldn't be the topic of our politics and I hope that anybody who is supporting me understands that is off limits.
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/obama_family_off_limits.php
You forgot a couple, McMeg:
Because ardent pro-lifer Sarah Palin was willing to gamble with the life of her unborn child repeatedly in a single day.
That would be this April 18, of course. You know the circumstances.
She claims to believe that the life of an unborn fetus is as valuable as yours or mine, and is in no way the property of the mother. She sure didn't act that way, did she?
Because Sarah Palin is in fact a bad mother.
Because if someone had started some unfortunate rumor about you and your underage daughter, and you could dispel it (a) by revealing your medical records to the world, or (b) by telling almost literally the entire world that your daughter was knocked up, I presume you (and anyone else who is or aspires to be a decent parent) would choose (a).
Palin chose (b).
I don't even do that sort of thing to my staff. The people who report to me at work know that if they screw up, it's strictly between me and them: if someone up the food chain finds out about the screwup, I'm going to put my name, not theirs, on it.
I would certainly do that for my kid, if I had one - and with any luck, I will soon, but that's another story. It boggles my mind that a mother would embarrass her daughter in front of the whole wide world, in order to quash a rumor that hadn't broken out of the lefty blogosphere, and was widely criticized even there.
I might add that, at this point, the truth of the 'babygate' rumor would be the only thing that could partially justify Palin's choices I've just mentioned. If she really isn't Trig's mother, then she didn't play Russian roulette with his life on April 18. And if she felt trapped in a corner on the 'babygate' story because there are no medical records verifying her pregnancy, it would at least explain - though not justify - her publicizing her daughter's pregnancy to get her own self off the hook.
None of us Obama supporters have anything to say about Bristol Palin's pregnancy. We're just eating popcorn and watching the show.
None of us Obama supporters have anything to say about Bristol Palin's pregnancy. We're just eating popcorn and watching the show.
Let's be clear: the McCain campaign is not naive enough to believe that the families of Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates aren't going to be in the public eye. If they are that naive, I sure as heck don't want them anywhere near the White House. If they knew, as McCain claims, that Bristol was pregnant before the VP pick was made, then they knew this "very private" story was going to come out on the national stage.
So why would they do this? Well, perhaps we can take a hint from the frothing-at-the mouth frenzy of righteous indignation closet McCainiacs like you have come up with anytime anyone mentions the story. We can also take a hint from the way they keep trying to tie the "leak" of the story to the Obama Campaign, even though there is not a shred of evidence to suggest such a connection, and Obama himself has stated he'd fire anyone in his campaign who'd make it an issue.
They want to see this girl get attacked. They want to see her privacy invaded, so they can then get concern trolls like you to wring their hands and cry crocodile tears over those "Awful liberals."
It wasn't the Obama campaign who dragged this young girl before the light of media scrutiny: it was Honorable John McCain when he picked Palin over vastly more experienced candidates.
And while we certainly applaud this principle that "the children are off limits," it should be noted that it's of recent vintage for Honorable John. This is a man who once joked "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno!"
They took a scared 17 year old pregnant girl and turned her into blog bait. They made her a diversion from Palin's glaring lack of qualifications.
And you're whining about what people do who aren't even part of the Obama campaign? Please.
"Because social conservatives are against sex education emphasizing birth control?"
Nice try bucko. Way to set that up as weakly as you can, so that you can best knock it down. Pretty sad reporting.
Let's try "Because Far Right social conservatives are against sex education in favor of abstinence ONLY education."
Because they keep pretending it works, even though it clearly doesn't. Sarah Palin's daughter is just one example of the fallacies of their beliefs. But it's not just that so many of the Far Right social conservatives are wrong, it's that they rarely change their opinion no matter how wrong they are proven to be. Worse yet still, they try to force their misguided "My specific interpretation of my Religion should be Law for all" philosophy. And that's a big deal.
Go ahead and vote for McCain already. Or Barr. Or write in Carol Burnett. I don't care. You don't even make sense anymore. But for God's sake stop pretending to be moderate. Your ridiculous contortions are embarrassing and your grip on reality is questionable at best.
Both Obama and McCain have said a pregnant 17 year old is a non-issue. So why are you still flapping your gums? Is it because the last thing you want people to talk about is the 10 billion of our tax money the bush administration is dumping into Iraq every month instead of fixing the levees in New Orleans? Or how our schools are crumbling and no child left behind has left them all behind? or how the bush administration should have invested in alternative energy in 2001 instead of giving everyone a $200 check, that way we wouldn't have $4 gas today.
Plus you have all your fact wrong. Do you only read blogs? The MSM sometimes has it right. Trig is her baby. Her daughter is pregnant, which shouldn't surprise anyone when you know the mayor of the town doesn't support sex education. End of story. How is Palin as a VP going to institute policy which will improve the future of her kids and grandkids. Teaching creationism in school doesn't sound too good to me.
None of us Obama supporters have anything to say about Bristol Palin's pregnancy. We're just eating popcorn and watching the show.
OK, I didn't mean to triple post, that just happened because I refreshed the page.
Clint wrote:
"I honestly haven't been following "Troopergate" that closely --- so I've just read the Wikipedia entry. (I know, I know... but it's a reasonable starting place...)"
Palin's staff made 30 changes to her Wikipedia entry the day before her selection was announced.
I for one saw the difference in the discussion (on Wikipedia) of Palin's role in the dairy closing incident. Completely omitted between revisions I read was that Palin had the entire board which SUPERVISED the dairy board dismissed, because she determined that was necessary to reverse the decision by the dairy board to close the money losing proposition (it was eventually closed anyhow, but not until it lost a lot more money).
Together with Troopergate, it shows a penchant for exercising power rivaled in recent times only by Eliot Spitzer. Of course Palin didn't call the Safety Commissioner herself. Her staffer (who has had his wrist slapped) called 24 TIMES. The (RECORDED) conversation went like this:
Bailey told him during the conversation that Palin and her husband want to know why Wooten still has a job.
"Todd and Sarah are scratching their heads, 'Why on earth hasn't this, why is this guy still representing the department?' He's a horrible recruiting tool, you know," Bailey told the lieutenant.
http://www.adn.com/monegan/story/492964.html
(Anchorage Daily News site)
Meg,
Did you write this screed on the way home from happy hour yesterday?
I can smell the spilled vodka and lime juice through the internets.
Exactly, JD-
We are talking about Bristol (such an unfortunate name for these circumstances!) because the campaign disclosed the information. In the case of Edwards, the parties were not talking, and to a large degree, the press respected the privacy of the parties until a public statement was made?
And where did the original whisper campaign about Trig come from? From Republicans - this is a red-on-red ratf*cking. The only liberals discussing this were some mooks on Daily Kos, who discussed it over a couple days and concluded that the rumour was false.
Then Sully got involved, and then Megan got all outragey and concern-trollish.
The only people who are blameless in all of this is the Obama campaign. Naturally, that means Megan wants to blame them for it.
Let's not overthink this or attempt to rationalize. The fact that Palin has an unmarried, pregnant, teenage daughter is "news" for the same reason it's news that Dick Cheney has a lesbian daughter and that male Republican members of Congress sexually harass teenage male pages and make out with dudes in airport bathrooms: unabashed hypocrisy, bigotry and unsolicited moral judgement, and a "holier than thou" attitude that, in the end, doesn't apply to their own lives. If you don't practice what you preach - while at the same time going out of your way to dictate and criticize the morality of others - you shouldn't be trusted to lead/potentially lead the richest nation on the planet.
If you don't practice what you preach - while at the same time going out of your way to dictate and criticize the morality of others - you shouldn't be trusted to lead/potentially lead the richest nation on the planet.
Whew! It's a good thing Gore didn't get elected to push CO2 reduction on us all, then.
"On Sarah Palin as a VP I have no particular opinion, except that she doesn't make me any more interested in voting for John McCain. But the people criticizing her are making me considerably less interested in voting for Obama. If this sort of deranged logic produces unwavering support for Obama, I have to question my own judgement."
The people criticizing her for any reason? Or just over the daughter's baby daddy crap?
At any rate, this is a pretty stupid post. Obama already slammed this stuff. I think the fact that some Obama supporters are sick of the birth certificate crap and pissed isn't hugely surprising.
Oh I am so worried. There are so many things Palin just doesn’t bring to the ticket .......
Here is the short list.....
1. A son who lobbies her like Biden's son did for the Bankruptcy law change that is screwing people who have nothing left.
2. Terrorist friends that that helped her get a start in politics and wish they blew up more of the country like Bill Ayres
3. Criminal friends that helped her buy a house and are on their way to jail like Tony Rezko
4. A pastor that taught her everything she knows about religion, a minister/mentor who is full of racist hate like Rev Wright
5. An angry husband is incapable of counting his blessings that says he is proud of his country for the first time in his adult life.
Oh and the very very worst.........
She doesn’t have a penis! It’s only ok to be a successful woman democrat (but not Hillary).
Oh but I bet DailyKos wants her to prove that too!
2. Terrorist friends that that helped her get a start in politics and wish they blew up more of the country like Bill Ayres
You may wish to examine the tendencies of Sarah Palin's separatist friends.
On the "Troopergate" issue, some relevant info is discussed here (3rd and 4th paragraphs from the bottom):
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=N2EyM2Q2NjYxZmUxMzgxNTYwMjAwZDk3MmE2NGNmNjY=
I know better than to bother with this, but really some of what you've written is so egregiously false that, against my better judgement, I just can't let it pass. So:
See, the problem here is, there is quite good evidence that sex education that not only teaches about birth control but also provides access to it (for those students whose parents grant permission) not only reduces teen pregnancies, it reduces them by a monumental, incredible amount. We're talking like 2/3 - 3/4 reductions.
Let me tell you a little fairy tale about a woman named Joycelyn Elders. When she headed the state department of health in Arkansas, several school districts approached her and requested help from the department in reducing teen pregnancies. These districts all had alarming pregnancy rates. Some of them were majority black and some were lily-white...but they all had horrendous teen pregnancy rates. At the request of the districts and district parents, the department opened clinics in these districts' high schools and began teaching comprehensive sex ed with an emphasis on preventing pregnancies and STDs. The school clinics also distributed condoms. The parents of each student in these schools determined whether or not their child would participate in the sex ed classes or have access to the clinics. Those who objected opted out.
Within a year, every participating district had seen a 65% or greater reduction in pregnancies. And of the pregnancies that did occur, guess what? None of them were students who had participated in the comprehensive sex ed program and had access to a clinic.
I can understand why you're ignorant of this, Meagan, because it was people like you who willfully mischaracterized the program to paint Bill Clinton as a devil who forced honest, decent, god-fearing parents to hand their children over to the mercy of the liberal deviant state. But you can go look it up; it was set up exactly as I've described and had the results I've noted here. And I shouldn't fail to mention also that Dr. Elders was subsequently hounded from her appointment in the Clinton administration by the same and other juvenile minds who insisted on twisting a statement about how "masturbation should be taught as a natural part of human sexuality" into "OMG!!11!! They're going to teach your kids how to masturbate!!!11! AT SCHOOL!!1! That's how SICK these people are!" rather than, you know, the reasonable explanation, that the woman was clearly saying that we need to teach kids that it is a natural part of human sexuality, not some type of illness. And let's face it - teens don't get pregnant from masturbating.
Second, let's note for the record that there aren't any studies that demonstrate any benefit from abstinence-only sex ed. They don't exist. You're welcome to refute me by linking to some that suggest a positive outcome.
See, the problem isn't that the evidence isn't out there - it's that you don't like what the evidence says because it doesn't agree with your pre-concieved notion about what OUGHT to work better, what in the best of all possible worlds would be the IDEAL solution. Hey, that's great - the only problem is, this isn't the best of all possible worlds; it's pretty easy to imagine ways in which it could be better than it is. As such, IDEAL solutions that speak to conditions in that best of all possible worlds tend to not work nearly so well in the actual real world we inhabit. Simple as that. A solution that isn't premised on actual conditions isn't going to work as well in practice as it does in theory. In the real world where it matters whether things work or not, the ideal bridge or dam or building gets tweaked so it will best fit with the actual conditions where it's going to have to perform. Otherwise, it's going to fail in one way or another.
This, in a nutshell, is the glaring hole at the center of current conservative/libertarian ideology. It's all premised on a world that exists only in your imagination. I don't want to harsh your ideological buzz, Meagan; after all, idealism is a good thing overall that helps us envision a better world, and we won't get one of those without thinking about what it would look like. But you don't get to it by pretending that it's already here and tailoring policy as if it is. And all the kicking and screaming obstructionist tantrums against solutions for the real world - solutions that don't match the ones that would work in your ideal world - won't bring it about either.
We must inhabit different worlds (or at least blogospheres). It seemed to me Obama supporters were tiptoeing around this. Obama himself couldn't have been clearer. As you say, it is news, and journalists by their nature could not help but talk about what effect the disclosures might have, but I heard no outrage anywhere. The Trig conspiracy theories were touted by only one normally respectable blogger I can think of (Sullivan). Rail against him if you must, but I don't see why Obama or Obama supporters generally deserves blame.
Now, there has also been a discussion of how McCain made a rash choice and lied about some aspects of how that choice was made. That's perfectly legit. Many people think he is dangerously nonanalytical. People making this point are not attacking the Palin family or blowing a someone else's normal family crisis out of proportion.
"Bill Clinton using a White House intern like a cheap whore in the Oval Office and lying about same under oath: not a problem."
Are you retarded or something? Bill Clinton was impeached because of his actions. Not a problem? What world do you live in? Oh that's right, the extreme-right world.
Sarah Palin is turning out to be a typical politician, not a "normal" person. Extreme views and abusing her power. WAKE THE F**K UP AMERICA! For The People, By The People!
>
It's a problem because she preaches abstinence and family values. Imagine if this was Chelsea Clinton in the 90’s. I can’t imagine what the Republicans would have done with that. I also find it amusing that NOW John McCain thinks that children should be off limits. He didn’t seem to feel that way when he asked reporters “do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because her mother is Hillary Clinton and her father is Janet Reno”. Why are families off limits now? He had NO problem taking a cheap shot at a 13-14 year old girl then why have the rules changed now?
In any job interview, HR cannot, by law, ask me how I plan to care for my chldren. So, why are we all worried about Sarah Palin's child care choices?
"Bill Clinton using a White House intern like a cheap whore in the Oval Office and lying about same under oath: not a problem."
Are you retarded or something? Bill Clinton was impeached because of his actions. Not a problem? What world do you live in? Oh that's right, the extreme-right world.
Sarah Palin is turning out to be a typical politician, not a "normal" person. Extreme views and abusing her power. WAKE THE F**K UP AMERICA! For The People, By The People!
You forgot a couple, McMeg:
Because ardent pro-lifer Sarah Palin was willing to gamble with the life of her unborn child repeatedly in a single day.
That would be this April 18, of course. You know the circumstances.
She claims to believe that the life of an unborn fetus is as valuable as yours or mine, and is in no way the property of the mother. She sure didn't act that way, did she?
Because Sarah Palin is in fact a bad mother.
Because if someone had started some unfortunate rumor about you and your underage daughter, and you could dispel it (a) by revealing your medical records to the world, or (b) by telling almost literally the entire world that your daughter was knocked up, I presume you (and anyone else who is or aspires to be a decent parent) would choose (a).
Palin chose (b).
I don't even do that sort of thing to my staff. The people who report to me at work know that if they screw up, it's strictly between me and them: if someone up the food chain finds out about the screwup, I'm going to put my name, not theirs, on it.
I would certainly do that for my kid, if I had one - and with any luck, I will soon, but that's another story. It boggles my mind that a mother would embarrass her daughter in front of the whole wide world, in order to quash a rumor that hadn't broken out of the lefty blogosphere, and was widely criticized even there.
I might add that, at this point, the truth of the 'babygate' rumor would be the only thing that could partially justify Palin's choices I've just mentioned. If she really isn't Trig's mother, then she didn't play Russian roulette with his life on April 18. And if she felt trapped in a corner on the 'babygate' story because there are no medical records verifying her pregnancy, it would at least explain - though not justify - her publicizing her daughter's pregnancy to get her own self off the hook.
>
It's a problem because she preaches abstinence and family values. Imagine if this was Chelsea Clinton in the 90’s. I can’t imagine what the Republicans would have done with that. I also find it amusing that NOW John McCain thinks that children should be off limits. He didn’t seem to feel that way when he asked reporters “do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because her mother is Hillary Clinton and her father is Janet Reno”. Why are families off limits now? He had NO problem taking a cheap shot at a 13-14 year old girl then why have the rules changed now?
Meagan,
Are you on drugs?
Seriously, are you on drugs? or did you finally decide to jump off the "I am a journalist and serious writter" ledge.
So all that writing for some many years leading up to the chance to be respectible and you blow it big time.
Yes, it is all about abortion isn't it? Well, as you cotemplate what "might have been" maybe you will also contemplate that idea of yours in the "quiet years" ahead.
Adios.
So, we are treated to the spectacle of feminists saying that a mother should stay at home with her kids, and liberals defending a state trooper who abused his wife, threatened to put a bullet in his father in law, and used a police taser on is 11 year old step son. And excoriating a unwed teen mother, when their standard bearer was conceived out of wedlock. Why are we not hearing about great father Joe Biden's son who is under indictment for fraud? Or, Senator Biden ( D-MBNA) and the bankruptcy bill? Or his cozy relationships with lobbyists - I thought Obama hated lobbyists?
Meagan,
Are you on drugs?
Seriously, are you on drugs? or did you finally decide to jump off the "I am a journalist and serious writter" ledge.
So all that writing for some many years leading up to the chance to be respectible and you blow it big time.
Yes, it is all about abortion isn't it? Well, as you cotemplate what "might have been" maybe you will also contemplate that idea of yours in the "quiet years" ahead.
Adios.
Ever since Andrew Sullivan's book bombed (due to negative reviews from the right), he's been irrationally bitter. There's almost a sad quality to the hysteria of his posts.
Megan (above), Tyler Cowen, and Ross Douthat (typically big fans of Sullivan) have strongly criticized him. Hopefully he'll tone down his cruel rhetoric.
By the way, this will be Bristol's SECOND child by her own father, Todd. There is no birth certificate for Trig, for the simple reason that Sarah didn't give birth to the little squirt. Oh and by the way, where was Bristol the day Trig was born?
Another question for Sarah Palin when she's answering the other questions:
From the April 18, 2008 Anchorage Daily News:
Gov. Sarah Palin gave birth to her fifth child at 6:30 this morning at Mat-Su Regional Medical Center, her spokeswoman said today.
The boy's name is Trig Paxson Van Palin. He's 6 pounds, 2 ounces.
"The governor's labor began while she was in Texas, and I do know that she got on a plane and landed in Anchorage late last night," said Palin spokeswoman Sharon Leighow.
Leighow said the governor and her son are healthy and resting comfortably today.
The baby wasn't due until May 18. "It was quite a surprise," Leighow said.
The online record for births at Mat-Su Regional Medical Center on April 18, 2008 show two births, neither a Trig Palin.
(h/t Daily Dish)
The venom coming out of the Left on the Palin nomination (& Bristol's pregnancy) is very revealing.
They must FEAR something. You wouldn't hear a peep out of them if McCain had selected a real dud. Peggy Noonan said it well: "They [the Left] must kill it and kill it quickly."
America, give Gov. Palin to speak for herself before you heed the lies from the Snake-Pit.
The debates---bring 'em on!
Megan,
Before making absolute statements about controversial social policy issues I suggest you do your research. You claimed that, "This would be vastly more compelling if there were any good evidence that sex education emphasizing birth control works any better than sex education emphasizing abstinence." Are you saying there is no evidence to support this claim? There may not be much in the way of supporting abstinence-only programs, but comparative studies have shown positive significant results with Comprehensive Sex Education programs, see Kirby et al., Ekstrand et al., and St. Lawrence et al. Blogging may give one the distinct luxury of airing dirty laundry without having to be held accountable, but that's still no reason to disregard any form of journalistic integrity. Especially when there is a significantly sized readership of said blog.
Scratch a liberal find a fascist now has a corollary.
Scratch liberals find misogynists who demand that women be kept barefoot and in the kitchen.
I suspect that the tankerloads of slime the left have been dumping on the Palin family are going to slosh back at the left in a way they are not going to like.
Since nobody else seems to have taken this one:
More people have brought up her alleged membership or involvement with the Alaskan Independence Party. Again I ask what is wrong with advocating peaceful secession.
I have no problem if Alaska (or Hawaii, or Vermont or some other state or territory) wants to leave the union as part of a mutually agreed upon framework approved by the federal gov't.
I have no problem with it either. However, if Sarah Palin actually, herself, favored succession (not yet proven), we'd have someone who wants to be Vice President, and thus possibly President, of the United States, and yet at one time did not want to be a citizen of the United States. That sure seems like something to point out.
To say Megan misses the point is too generous. She invents her own points and then rebuts them. Also known as the strawman argument.
With respect to the teenaged daughter's pregnancy, the issue that is raised - the real issue - is Sarah Palin's judgment and character. Not her abilities as a mother. Her judgment and character.
What person in their right mind would knowingly place a pregnant 17 year old on the national stage, knowing she would be in the public eye throughout her pregnancy and through the child's birth? What parent would knowingly subject their daughter to such humiliation just for the sake of a political campaign.
Sarah Palin has demonstrated that she is willing to put her political ambition ahead of the well-being of her family. That is not a question of simple motherhood, it is a question of judgment and character.
You see, John McCain is not Bristol's mother, but he made the exact same choice. Aside from what it says about his common sense in putting his campaign at risk, it says he too is willing to put political ambition ahead of a child's well-being.
Shame on them both.
First of all, Bill Clinton didn't treat a White House intern like a cheap whore. He bought her a book of poetry after all - he treated her like an upper middle-class whore.
Further, I seem to recall him getting impeached. How it that after all that crap I heard from conservatives about morals, honesty and integrity - its somehow the liberals who are the preening moral snobs in need of having their hypocrisy thrown back in their face?
Putting aside the Palin family baby boom and who's pregnant, etc. - I think she's getting far more of the "this is a personal matter, so lets stay out of it" from journalist and liberals. They're only snickering when the cameras are off. And since when is the fact that liberals are idiots news? If this situation tells us anything its that one hundred years from now, half the world's population will be related to Sarah Palin AND John McCain really, really sucks at picking running mates.
It's the hypocrisy, stupid!
The race hasn't "come down to" the Palin pregnancy soap opera (some wish it were only this). It's just a story of virulent interest.
Since the invention of the printing press, low men and women on the totem pole have been fascinated by the powerful taking a public fall. Why would we expect this "first woman on the Republican ticket" to be spared?
And its always more of a fascination when hypocrites in power are outed. When conservatives' message and policies are put to the test. What I've heard from the right for the last 20 years is this: "we've got family values" and "dirty things like teen pregnancy don't happen to us because we go to church, we teach abstinence, we watch G movies, we are pro 'life' even if it leads to the death of the pregnant mother."
THis is the story that says, "yes it does SO happen to values spewing Republicans."
Public speculation about the maternity of the Palins' youngest baby is cruel, yes. But if its true that Bristol is the true birth mother, what did the Palins and McCain expect? This is a gossip loving, National Star reading nation.
What kind of family values did the Palins display injecting their daughter into such a glaring limelight? What kind of political instinct did Sarah Palin show in choosing to join the McCain ticket knowing her child's reproductive habits would become national fodder?
Megan, get ahold of yourself. help is on the way!
It's the hypocrisy, stupid!
The race hasn't "come down to" the Palin pregnancy soap opera (some wish it were only this). It's just a story of virulent interest.
Since the invention of the printing press, low men and women on the totem pole have been fascinated by the powerful taking a public fall. Why would we expect this "first woman on the Republican ticket" to be spared?
And its always more of a fascination when hypocrites in power are outed. When conservatives' message and policies are put to the test. What I've heard from the right for the last 20 years is this: "we've got family values" and "dirty things like teen pregnancy don't happen to us because we go to church, we teach abstinence, we watch G movies, we are pro 'life' even if it leads to the death of the pregnant mother."
THis is the story that says, "yes it does SO happen to values spewing Republicans."
Public speculation about the maternity of the Palins' youngest baby is cruel, yes. But if its true that Bristol is the true birth mother, what did the Palins and McCain expect? This is a gossip loving, National Star reading nation.
What kind of family values did the Palins display injecting their daughter into such a glaring limelight? What kind of political instinct did Sarah Palin show in choosing to join the McCain ticket knowing her child's reproductive habits would become national fodder?
Megan, I can't believe anyone takes you seriously. You're a joke and a disgrace.
Megan, I can't believe anyone takes you seriously. You're a joke and a disgrace.
Oh, shit. Megan. Please. Don't let this make you vote for John McCain. We Obamamaniacs can't afford to lose you! This ugliness isn't our fault, really. Your tortured reason really can't be argued with, but still...please, don't abandon us!!! We need you!!!
"But the people criticizing her are making me considerably less interested in voting for Obama."
Then sit at home--oh, and never ever utter a single peep of criticism about anything the winner does as President because instead of voting, you sat at home on your self-righteous ass.
And we heard about the Rev. Jeremy Wright for HOW LONG? Somehow this is a bit more relevant.
Letting the actions of some dumbass supporters of a candidate influence your vote is just as stupid as hemming and hawing about another candidate's child's profligacy.
You neglect also to mention that Obama himself condemned the making of political hay out of candidates' family issues.
Frankly I think this nothing issue is distracting from the much more troubling news that dropped today that Governor Palin has been associated with the secessionist Alaskan Independence Party.
Really Brendan? You think the fact that Palin addressed a meeting of the secessionist party - she's never been a member - is troubling? More troubling than any of Obama's associations? That's really interesting. Suddenly past associations, no matter how casual, are significant.
Meanwhile, over at Kos:
If health insurance for all, an end to the Iraq War, an end to torture and illegal wiretapping, and a sane energy policy can be obtained at the price of destroying one teenage girl, her family, and the surrendering our self-respect I see that as a cheap trade.
Are you telling me you would not destroy the love a family holds for one another, even if it meant letting someone who would destroy the constitution become president?
None of use would use these tactics in a perfect world. It is not a perfect world. It is a fallen world. We have to judge costs and benefits, not moral absolutes. I know this is the way to fanaticism and destruction—believe me I do. But, when we face opponents such as the ones we face . . . what else is there for us to do?
What choice do we have? When faced with monsters, we have to be monstrous ourselves.
Republicans are not political opponents, you see. They are monsters, and defeating them will justify the use of anything.
I wouldn't be voting for Obama anyway, I admit that. But if I had ever been so inclined - yes, the cesspool in which such a large bloc of the left now lives would make me vote against him. Because if Obama wins, these scum will have seen their actions and beliefs rewarded and validated. I want the Democratic party to locate its balls and its conscience and flush them back down whatever sewer spit them out eight years ago. A McCain victory would be a good start.
Really Brendan? You think the fact that Palin addressed a meeting of the secessionist party - she's never been a member - is troubling? More troubling than any of Obama's associations? That's really interesting. Suddenly past associations, no matter how casual, are significant.
Meanwhile, over at Kos:
If health insurance for all, an end to the Iraq War, an end to torture and illegal wiretapping, and a sane energy policy can be obtained at the price of destroying one teenage girl, her family, and the surrendering our self-respect I see that as a cheap trade.
Are you telling me you would not destroy the love a family holds for one another, even if it meant letting someone who would destroy the constitution become president?
None of use would use these tactics in a perfect world. It is not a perfect world. It is a fallen world. We have to judge costs and benefits, not moral absolutes. I know this is the way to fanaticism and destruction—believe me I do. But, when we face opponents such as the ones we face . . . what else is there for us to do?
What choice do we have? When faced with monsters, we have to be monstrous ourselves.
Republicans are not political opponents, you see. They are monsters, and defeating them will justify the use of anything.
I wouldn't be voting for Obama anyway, I admit that. But if I had ever been so inclined - yes, the cesspool in which such a large bloc of the left now lives would make me vote against him. Because if Obama wins, these scum will have seen their actions and beliefs rewarded and validated. I want the Democratic party to locate its balls and its conscience and flush them back down whatever sewer spit them out eight years ago. A McCain victory would be a good start.
Megan,
Regarding your comment that there is no "good evidence that sex education emphasizing birth control works any better than sex education emphasizing abstinence", this is simply untrue. A cursory search on Google reveals numerous studies showing that sex education reduces teen pregnancies whereas abstinence education does not. See, for example: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2004293974_sexed20m.html. Perhaps you don't have access to Google?
Ooooh. double posts are so embarrassing. Many apologies.
Megan,
Regarding your comment that there is no "good evidence that sex education emphasizing birth control works any better than sex education emphasizing abstinence", this is simply untrue. A cursory search on Google reveals numerous studies showing that sex education reduces teen pregnancies whereas abstinence education does not. See, for example: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2004293974_sexed20m.html. Perhaps you don't have access to Google?
From JK, above: "Morally speaking, Sarah Palin and Bill Clinton are both trailer park trash. Are you satisfied now?"
A couple of points: I don't really think we know all that much about Sarah Palin's "morality", though we do know a bit more about Bill Clinton's. Secondly, the derisive "trailer park" label is an indication as to why trailer-parkish Clinton won, and why Palin will also probably be on the winning side. There are a lot of good people in trailer parks, too, and a lot of trash in some really expensive houses. And some trailer park trash do bother to vote.
So, the American public wants someone with "experience" to be President or Vice President, but we don't want "Washington insiders" or "Career" politicians? And when we get a genuine "outsider" who is not yet a "Career" politician all we hear is griping about their "inexperience"??? Do I have this right?
Did the founding fathers appear in any way to endorse the notion that anyone in Washington should be there in full time career job? Didn't think so..
Take a good long look at Governor Sarah Palin. This is Government as the founding fathers envisioned. Local ordinary citizens with the brains to manage and make decisions. I see people every week in my own job who would make a decent President if it were thrust upon them. Hardworking people who love their country and are willing to sacrifice for it and not afraid to take a stand for what they think is the correct course of action. Do I always agree with their views? No, But I respect their ideas and we do not have to agree 100% on everything.
So, take a good look, you may not see this again in your lifetime..
Ooooh. double posts are so embarrassing. Many apologies.
"A t least two writers in the 19th century foresaw the advent of totalitarianism. The first was Dostoevsky and the second was Nietzsche. Both writers grasped the intellectual trend of their day. As education advanced, as the human spirit was given new opportunities for understanding, the result was intellectual radicalism. In the 18th century Edmund Burke warned his contemporaries that education without religion or aristocratic principles would turn against mankind. Burke wrote: “Learning will be cast into the mire, and trodden down under the hoofs of a swinish multitude.” Burke added, “In the groves of their academy, at the end of every vista, you see nothing but gallows.” Overwhelmed with a similar insight, Dostoevsky and Nietzsche updated Burke’s lament. In Dostoevsky’s novel, The Possessed, a radical young intellectual advocated a world in which Cicero would have his tongue cut out, Copernicus would have his eyes put out, and Shakespeare would be stoned to death – in the name of universal equality. Dostoevsky predicted that the radical mentality – emerging in the 19th century – would kill 100 million peoplein the 20th century. Those without vision, without a sense of where the world was headed, disbelieved Dostoevsky’s prophecy. Such a calamity could never happen, because the world is not a madhouse.
Enter Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin. Enter, as well, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Fidel Castro, Ho Chi Minh, and today’s politically correct mob. What characterizes them, besides their egotism and narcissism, is their false idealism and moral posturing. According to Edmund Burke: “Nothing is more certain, than that our manners, our civilization, and all the good things which are connected with manners and with civilization, have, in this European world of ours, depended for ages upon two principles; and were indeed the result of both combined; I mean the spirit of a gentleman, and the spirit of religion.”
Since Burke’s time, modern intellectuals have overthrown the spirit of a gentleman and the spirit of religion. Every structure, every religious precept, every honored tradition, came under intellectual attack. God and country were targeted. Religion and patriotism were targeted. The main surviving ideals of our day are those of leveling, equalizing and taxing into penury. Envy is the Holy Grail of our intelligentsia, and the annihilation of all values is their ultimate end...
http://www.financialsense.com/stormwatch/geo/pastanalysis/2008/0829.html
J.R. Nyquist
Wow... are these posts typical of Atlantic readers? What a bunch of morons.
I think what you've said isn't based on any actual fact and sounds moronic. But, I value your right to your opinion.
Sarah Palin is a big mistake and should never, ever be vice president.
checkers, the last 8 years has been an experiment in the "anyone can do that job" school of being President of the US.
Yes indeed - how DARE anyone critcize the former director of a 527 for Ted Stevens, a former member & long-time supporter of a secessionist party, a woman currently under criminal investigation, & an advocate of taking away your right to a safe & legal abortion, even if you're raped? What kind of BARBARIANS would even think of such a thing? How DARE they?!
Her lies should inform you as to the nature of her character & her style - do you want her a heartbeat away from the presidency or don't you? With a candidate in his 70s, that's not a trivial matter. Will you still think of it as "noble" or "courageous" when you're the one she lies to?
"Sorry, I must have been confused."
Looks like the condition is ongoing.
Good luck with that.
I loved this tongue-in-cheek blog piece....I just want to know when the GOP will bring out the shotguns to have this young girl married to some young man---you bet it will before the election. Now, the Palins will have no voice in the matter and the young girl certainly will not--but McCain's people will polish off the guns--maybe use Sarah's gun which is always polished and oiled.
I liked listening to the recorded phone converstaion posted on CNN and other sites about trying to have Mike Wooten fired. Now that is how to use one's power. Maybe better would have been to force Wooten to drive off the bridge to no where that she so stronly supported...
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/09/02/moos.whats.her.name.cnn
Palin's daughter's 18-year-old boyfriend will be appearing with them. If Palin's daughter was 16 when she had sex, by Alaska state law, that is statutory rape.
http://blog.laborlawtalk.com/2006/10/18/alaska-statutory-rape-laws/
So why is no one addressing this issue?
And if someone is going to talk about having family values, I don't think that it is a good idea to take on the grueling and important job of vice president of the United States, while leaving your Down's Syndrome baby and 17-year-old pregnant daughter to do this job. I am all for a woman in the White House, but not when it is at the cost of someone's family. So where are these so-called family values? I think it is great that she is a new mother at 44, but I do not care for the hypocrisy.
Megan, you are now identified as a cast member of "The Exterminating Angel." That's a strange universe you live in, which arbitrarily limits the information available for each little tantrum that then is supposed to be considered by readers as an 'argument.'
In America, where I live and vote, Bill Clinton was impeached for having sex with a White House intern. But of course you're very young, and an egocentric narcissist, and the only history that happens is what happens to you.
And also, just who is doing all this moral scolding about Sarah Palin's daughter being pregnant? There are a class of professional scolds in America, but they are all praising this example of teen pregnancy - they've actually come around to the mythological liberal viewpoint. And what conspiracy theories are you talking about? Do you have a fever? This is all about John McCain's ability to make sound judgments - which speaks for itself. I do commend your anti-straw bravery, though.
Wow... are these posts typical of Atlantic readers? What a bunch of morons.
I agree with Steve. There are some real blithering idiots posting on this thread. The Left has come completely unhinged, though this rant-fest appears to be slowly fading as rationality rears its head again.
But fear not, I'm sure we'll learn that Sarah Palin broke wind in an elevator last February and Sullivan will have material for another day of posts.
Its been hit on a lot, but i do think the funniest comment i've head is that all Palin had to do to cover this story up was claim John Edwards was the father and the press would take care of the rest. Funny because its apparently true.
CNN sent an "Investigative Reporter" to Alaska (she will stay there several weeks!!!) to "investigate" the rumor that Bristol was the mother of Trig.
To say that it is only Sullivan who is pushing this crap is a lie.
The media is all in in trying to smear/destroy Palin through Bristol.
Wow -- the vitriol from the left is telling. What scares you so much about this nominee?
Couple points:
How come every point bringing up "Troopergate" fails to mention any facts about the trooper? Ask yourself, if an appointee failed to fire a trooper with this self-admitted behavior, wouldn't the left be calling for the governor's head in normal circumstances?
Why does every mention of the so-called membership in the AIP fail to mention that there's not one bit of evidence about this? This was debunked days ago. Drop it.
And for the uninformed dink above who used the Netherlands as the be-all-end-all of sex education, take it from one with pretty good personal knowledge of young Dutch girls use of contraception -- it ain't any different than Americans (or anywhere else in this great world). You might, however, want to take a look at their abortion rates. Megan's take on this is on mark.
It's the hypocrisy, stupid!
The race hasn't "come down to" the Palin pregnancy soap opera (some wish it were only this). It's just a story of virulent interest.
Since the invention of the printing press, low men and women on the totem pole have been fascinated by the powerful taking a public fall. Why would we expect this "first woman on the Republican ticket" to be spared?
And its always more of a fascination when hypocrites in power are outed. When conservatives' message and policies are put to the test. What I've heard from the right for the last 20 years is this: "we've got family values" and "dirty things like teen pregnancy don't happen to us because we go to church, we teach abstinence, we watch G movies, we are pro 'life' even if it leads to the death of the pregnant mother."
THis is the story that says, "yes it does SO happen to values spewing Republicans."
Public speculation about the maternity of the Palins' youngest baby is cruel, yes. But if its true that Bristol is the true birth mother, what did the Palins and McCain expect? This is a gossip loving, National Star reading nation.
What kind of family values did the Palins display injecting their daughter into such a glaring limelight? What kind of political instinct did Sarah Palin show in choosing to join the McCain ticket knowing her child's reproductive habits would become national fodder?
Prior to the embarrassing media treatment of Palin's family issues I was a lukewarm McCain voter. However, after watching Charlie Gibson last night post a picture on the news of the teenage father of baby, I couldn't take it anymore.
I'm now not a McCain voter.
I'm voting for Sarah Palin.
Prior to the embarrassing media treatment of Palin's family issues I was a lukewarm McCain voter. However, after watching Charlie Gibson last night post a picture on the news of the teenage father of baby, I couldn't take it anymore.
I'm now not a McCain voter.
I'm voting for Sarah Palin.
Mugsy,
That's a pretty shallow basis for deciding the next president.
"On Sarah Palin as a VP I have no particular opinion, except that she doesn't make me any more interested in voting for John McCain. But the people criticizing her are making me considerably less interested in voting for Obama."
So you're saying that the reaction to the Palin pick is more of a deciding factor than its actual merits?
How undeniably rational...
NOW will be calling for a National Boycott of US Magazine. Their continued sexist comments towards Sarah Palin is absolutely disgraceful! I have cancelled my subscription and have urged my corporate headquarters marketing department to cancel our advertising indefinitely in US Magazine and urge other clients to do the same.
I am a life-long democratic woman who supported Hillary Clinton along with 18 million others. I keep hearing Democratic strategists declaring that we "disgruntled Hillary supporters" will not vote for McCain simply because he chose a woman to be his VP. But this is NOT TRUE!
I along with thousands of other Hillary supporters WILL be voting for McCain and Sarah Palin because we WANT to see a woman as VP and voters like myself see it as a brilliant move by McCain to reach out to us women voters.
The TVangelists threaten us of Roe V Wade being overturn but fail to mention that both Bush administrations were Pro-Life and women still have the right to chose.
When Colorado Democratic Party leader Billy Compton intimidated Sacha Millstone asking her to resign as a Delegate because she had second thoughts on Obama was outrageous! When the sexist/racist Emil Jones called Delmarie Cobb who supported Hillary an "Uncle Tom" infuriates us women!
I am asking other Democratic women to join us in sending a message to our Democratic Party Leadership that THEY do not chose our Nominee by intimidating elected Delegates into voting for THEIR choice,,
The American political system is becoming a joke. Hey, I was the president of the Neighborhood Watch. Can I be Vice President? What a foolish attempt to get the female vote. There are so many strong and experienced women in the GOP, like Condeleza Rice, Elizabeth Dole, etc... I will be voting for Obama and wiping my butt with my Republican card. God help us if McCain wins and has health problems...we will have this Joke in charge of the country...I guess Putin, Bin Laden, Iran and the rest of the nut jobs in the world will take her very serious...if they don't she will send them to their beds without supper. Hey OBAMA...got room for one more Republican. All I can say is, "YES WE CAN!!!"
Sex?
no I say Lying about BTN,
being a creationst,
being AGAINST choice
etc
are reasons enough
Now political dynasties are fairly usual, Bristol Palin is probably going to find it convenient to have had her children early. She should be able to stsrt her political career even younger than her mother.
Megan, there's a couple of issues with your post:
John McTheusalah:
Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno.
Rush Limbaugh:
This incident from Limbaugh’s TV show–”Here is a Limbaugh joke: Everyone knows the Clintons have a cat. Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is a White House dog?” And he puts up a picture of Chelsea Clinton who is, at that time,13 years old.
David “Ho Ho Ho” Shuster:
Filling in for Tucker Carlson yesterday, Shuster gave his opinion on Chelsea’s role in the presidential campaign, asking a guest, “Doesn’t it seem as if Chelsea is sort of being pimped out in some weird sort of way?”
Amazingly, Shuster chose not to apologize, even when the Clinton camp expressed their outrage directly to him — until MSNBC bigwigs forced him to do so
Alicia “The Suetonius of Staten Island” Colon:
Seems to me that she’s more of a pawn for her parent’s ambitions than a beloved child. …
John “Humbert Humbert” Derbyshire:
I hate Chelsea Clinton.
Be sure to read the rest of Derb’s mauling of the only female between 15 and 20 that he doesn’t find attractive.***@**Sadly No
As well, Republican County Constable Larry Dale Floyd was arrested on suspicion of soliciting sex with an 8-year old girl. Floyd has repeatedly won elections for Denton County, Texas, constable.
Republican judge Mark Pazuhanich of Wilkes Barre, Pennsylvania pled no contest to fondling a 10-year old girl and was sentenced to 10 years probation.
Republican Party leader Bobby Stumbo of Floyd County, Kentucky was arrested for having sex with a 5-year old boy.
Republican teacher and former city councilman John Collins of Asbury Park, New Jersey pled guilty to sexually molesting 13 and 14 year old girls.
Republican campaign worker Mark Seidensticker of Nashua, New Hampshire is a convicted child molester.
Republican Mayor Philip Giordano of Waterbury, Connecticut is serving a 37-year sentence in federal prison for sexually abusing 8 and 10-year old girls.
Republican Mayor John Gosek of Oswego, New York was arrested on charges of soliciting sex from two 15-year old girls.
Republican County Commissioner David Swartz of Richland County, Ohio pled guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 11 and was sentenced to 8 years in prison.
Republican Speaker of the Puerto Rico House of Representatives Edison Misla Aldarondo was sentenced to 10 years in prison for raping his daughter between the ages of 9 and 17.
Republican Committeeman John R. Curtain of Monroe County, Pennsylvania was charged with molesting a teenage boy and unlawful sexual contact with a minor.
Republican anti-abortion activist Howard Scott Heldreth of Kannapolis, N.C., is a convicted child rapist in Florida.
Republican zoning supervisor, Boy Scout leader and Lutheran church president Dennis L. Rader of Witchita, Kansas pled guilty to performing a sexual act on an 11-year old girl he murdered.
Republican anti-abortion activist Nicholas Morency of Camden, New Jersey pled guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer and offering a bounty to anybody who murders an abortion doctor.
Republican campaign consultant Tom Shortridge of Soputhbay, California was sentenced to three years probation for taking nude photographs of a 15-year old girl.
Republican racist pedophile and United States Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina had sex with a 15-year old black girl which produced a child.
Republican pastor Mike Hintz of Des Moines, Iowa, who George W. Bush commended during the 2004 presidential campaign, surrendered to police after admitting to a sexual affair with a female juvenile.
Republican legislator Peter Dibble of New London, Connecticut pled no contest to having an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old girl.
Republican advertising consultant Carey Lee Cramer of Arizona was charged with molesting his 9-year old step daughter after including her in an anti-Gore television commercial.
Republican activist Lawrence E. King, Jr. and Republican lobbyist Craig J. Spence both of Washington, D.C. organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.
Republican Congressman Donald “Buz” Lukens of Columbus, Ohio was found guilty of having sex with a female minor and sentenced to one month in jail.
Republican fundraiser Richard A. Delgaudio of Burke, Virginia was found guilty of child porn charges and paying two teenage girls to pose for sexual photos.
Republican activist Mark A. Grethen of Colorado Springs. Colorado was convicted on six counts of sex crimes involving children.
Republican activist Randal David Ankeney of El Paso County, Arizona pled guilty to attempted sexual assault on a child.
Republican Congressman Dan Crane of Illinois had sex with a female minor working as a congressional page.
Republican activist and Christian Coalition and South Carolina Republican leader Beverly Russell admitted to an incestuous relationship with his step daughter.
Republican Judge Ronald C. Kline of Orange County, California was placed under house arrest for child molestation and possession of child pornography.
Republican congressman and anti-gay activist Robert Bauman of Maryland was charged with having sex with a 16-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar.
Republican Committee Chairman and attorney Jeffrey Patti of Sparta, New Jersey was arrested for distributing a video clip of a 5-year-old girl being raped.
Republican activist Marty Glickman of Florida (a.k.a. “Republican Marty”), was taken into custody by Florida police on four counts of unlawful sexual activity with an underage girl and one count of delivering the drug LSD. It was Glickman, interestingly enough, that claimed Bill Clinton came from a low rent state and had torn down all of the standards for the highest office in the land.
Republican legislative aide Howard L. Brooks of Quartz Hill, California was charged with molesting a 12-year old boy and possession of child pornography.
Republican Senate candidate John Hathaway who had relocated to Maine from Huntsville, Alabama after having been accused of having sex with his 12-year old baby sitter and withdrew his candidacy after the allegations were reported in the media.
Republican preacher Stephen White of West Chester, Pennsylvania, who demanded a return to traditional values, was sentenced to jail after offering $20 to a 14-year-old boy for permission to perform oral sex on him.
Republican talk show host Jon Matthews of Houston, Texas pled guilty to exposing his genitals to an 11 year old girl.
Republican anti-gay activist Earl “Butch” Kimmerling of Anderson, Indiana was sentenced to 40 years in prison for molesting an 8-year old girl after he attempted to stop a gay couple from adopting her.
Republican Party leader Paul Ingram of Thurston County, Washington pled guilty to six counts of raping his daughters and served 14 years in federal prison.
Republican election board official Kevin Coan of St. Louis, Missouri was sentenced to two years probation for soliciting sex over the internet from a 14-year old girl.
Republican politician Andrew Buhr, also of St. Louis, was charged with two counts of first degree sodomy with a 13-year old boy.
Republican politician Keith Westmoreland of Kingsport, Tennessee was arrested on seven felony counts of lewd and lascivious exhibition to girls under the age of 16 (i.e. exposing himself to children).
Republican anti-abortion activist John Allen Burt of Pensacola, Florida was found guilty of molesting a 15-year old girl.
Republican County Councilman Keola Childs of Hawaii County, Hawaii pled guilty to molesting a male child.
Republican activist John Butler of Cass County, Illinois was charged with criminal sexual assault on a teenage girl.
Republican candidate Richard Gardner of Clark County, Nevada admitted to molesting his two daughters.
Republican Councilman and former Marine Jack W. Gardner of Lancaster, Pennsylvania was convicted of molesting a 13-year old girl.
Republican County Commissioner Merrill Robert Barter of Boothbay, Maine pled guilty to unlawful sexual contact and assault on a teenage boy.
Republican City Councilman Fred C. Smeltzer, Jr. of Wrightsville Borough, Delaware pled no contest to raping a 15 year-old girl and served 6-months in prison.
Republican activist Parker J. Bena pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography on his home computer and was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison and fined $18,000.
Republican parole board officer and former Colorado state representative, Larry Jack Schwarz, was fired after child pornography was found in his possession.
Republican strategist and Citadel Military College graduate Robin Vanderwall of Virginia was convicted in Virginia on five counts of soliciting sex from boys and girls over the internet.
Republican city councilman Mark Harris of West Bend, Wisconsin, who has been described as a “good military man” and “church goer,” was convicted of repeatedly having sex with an 11-year-old girl and sentenced to 12 years in prison.
Republican businessman Jon Grunseth withdrew his candidacy for Minnesota governor after allegations surfaced that he went swimming in the nude with four underage girls, including his daughter.
Republican director of the “Young Republican Federation” Nicholas Elizondo of Bakersfield, California molested his 6-year old daughter and was sentenced to six years in prison.
Republican president of the New York City Housing Development Corp, Russell Harding, pled guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer.
Republican benefactor of conservative Christian groups, Richard A. Dasen, Sr. of Kalispell, Montana, was found guilty of raping a 15-year old girl. Dasen, 62, who is married with grown children and several grandchildren, has allegedly told police that over the past decade he paid more than $1 million to have sex with a large number of young women.
Republican Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the Bush admisnistration authorized the imprisonment, and torure of children in Iraqi prisons in order to humiliate their parents into providing information about the anti-American insurgency.
10's of thousands of children have been killed in Bush's war.
These are all matters of public record, not hearsay. They have been reported in both the local press where the incidents occurred and in various national media. Their major similarity is that they are Republican Conservative Christian activists who have made their mark by preaching family values while performing unspeakable acts of perversion, many with minors.
Megan, did you speak out about these people? Did it make you think of not voting republican? Did you express your concerns about any of these issues? Did Mayor Palin's stand against sex education for teenagers give you pause? Did her slashing of aid for homeless teenagers, some of them pregnant, others with babies, make you think about her ultra-rigid conservatism? If not, why not?
Sarah Palin is not qualified to be vice-president. Period. She cannot control her own daughter. How would this women who has never left Alaska but 2 times in her life, fair in the middle east. This is so frightening. Mc Cain has proven he cannot be trusted with our future. He chose a this women out of desperation, not for the good of our children. How dare he treat this office of VP with such disrespect.
Megan,
I love that you so easily excuse the Limbaugh-Drudge-blogosphere group that does the real dirty work of the right by suggesting that you're above it. Were that true, I would expect you to actually attempt a little housecleaning and not a simple acceptance of their nature.
With that in mind, could you please point to some actual Obama supporters hyperventilating about this and not just, you know, Republican operatives accusing Obama supporters of hyperventilation? For full credit, find someone on the campaign (or, at least, with a capital D behind their name) and not just some b.s. artist on an op-ed page who has (quite likely) written nasty columns about Obama as well.
I do find it odd, though, that right wing blogs and radio types blamed Jamie Lynn Spears' parents for their daughter's pregnancy, but, in the case of Bristol Palin, it's being spun into an example of Sarah's excellent parenting.
What a bunch of hypocrites.
What I love about McArdle's perrennial emotionalism is that she STILL thinks spending $55 million to chase Clinton was OK, but feels that ANY inquiries into an unknown's "bona fides" are completely beyond the pale.
Yawn. Another day of what passes for logic in the McArdle world.
Mark,
Can you remind me of Obama's qualifications for office? 2 years in the senate? That's what he had when he started running? State senator? Community Organizer? C'mon - if you really took the qualification argument seriously, we'd be talking about candidate Clinton.
Let me get this straight. You are less likely to vote for Barack Obama because a small majority of his supporters are delighted that Sarah Palin and John McCain, who vote against programs to support teen mothers and sex-ed, find themselves in a difficult family situation, difficult only because of the morals that religious conservatives like Sarah Palin would like to impose upon the rest of us? Would this be the same Barack Obama who publicly stated he felt this story was a non-story and threatened to fire anyone on his staff who acted otherwise?
Get a clue. Making a decision on who to vote for based on the actions of a fringe group of supporters rather than on the actions of the candidates themselves shows a distinct lack of "judgement" [sic] on your part.
The media likes the undernews. The Obama supporters I know are talking about Palin's extreme views on abortion, creationism, her lack of foreign policy experience, her hypocracy on pork and earmarks, and the irony her relationship with an anti-federal government Alaska-first political party when McCain's slogan is "America First."
Megan: The most damaging is membership in AIP.
Good concern Megan. Too bad this rumor that many decided to run with is untrue.
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/09/palin-and-the-a.html
Or in your mind does her husband's participation in the AIP automatically make her a member. I don't think you want to make that argument on this site.
Excellent point, David. Megan pseudo-rejects the right's broadly supported conseratives (Limbaugh, after all, gets a lot of big name interviewees on his program), but then suggests that those on the far left whom the candidate has explicitly rejected represent the left as a whole.
Very clever.
i think sarah palin must be the republican's PERFECT vp candidate. if she weren't....the democrats would not be so completely against her. they'd say 'eh.. what does it matter..the mccain ticket doesn't have a chance anyway'. ..the fact that they are speaking out so vehemently against her proves that they know she's a great choice and strengthens the ticket. a reality that scares democrats to death so they dig deep to find 'something' and then twist it and present it in as skewed a manner as possible to lessen her likeability. suddenly obama doesn't have a lock on the election so it's smeeeeeeeear time.
Sorry, I get confused by this format. Obviously the bad quote about the AIP was from farah. My mistake.
i think sarah palin must be the republican's PERFECT vp candidate. if she weren't....the democrats would not be so completely against her. they'd say 'eh.. what does it matter..the mccain ticket doesn't have a chance anyway'. ..the fact that they are speaking out so vehemently against her proves that they know she's a great choice and strengthens the ticket. a reality that scares democrats to death so they dig deep to find 'something' and then twist it and present it in as skewed a manner as possible to lessen her likeability. suddenly obama doesn't have a lock on the election so it's smeeeeeeeear time.
1. Abstinence only education does not work and teen pregnancy statistics overwhelmingly support this.
2. I agree with those who say the children of presidential candidates should be off limits. My question is this: why did Sarah Palin thrust her daughter into the national spotlight and subject her to the ire of the nation? What kind of parent does that? What the conservatives forget is that after you decide not to abort, you actually have to parent.
3. If Obama had a pregnant 17 year old daughter, this game would be over.
Some very simple points.
1) Looking at the pro-life -v- pro-choice issue from a strictly moral standpoint.
a. Only God can create a person. It is by of the use of a man and a woman that God performs this miracle. Therefore, regardless of the method by which a woman is inseminated, it is morally wrong to perform or be involved in the abortion of a fetus.
2) Admittedly only the most rabid pro-lifers hold this belief.
3) Sarah Palin agrees that it is permissible to abort a fetus so as to save the life of the mother.
What an incredibly loving and christian view of the the miracle of conception.
There is only one problem with this way of looking at this issue.
A woman who wants a child above all else is told by a group of doctors that there is a sixty percent likelihood that carrying the "baby" to term will kill her. According to Ms. Palin's belief system, this woman can choose to terminate the pregnancy or take her chances.
Same woman, except now she has been raped/is the victim by incest. Having lived through this trauma learns she is pregnant. Having recovered from the rape/being incested and otherwise in good health, the "baby" does not pose a threat to her life. She is legally barred from seeking an abortion.
Same woman, becomes pregnant through a studied act of drunken stupidity on her part becomes pregnant. The "baby" poses no threat to the "mother's" life, NO ABORTION FOR YOU!!!!!
The point here is very simple, on the surface Ms. Palin's religious beliefs are laudable. However, looking just a hair under the surface, they are selfish and self serving.
FOR ALL YOU FOOLS HAVE HAVE'T FIGURED IT OUT YET, ROE -V- WADE WAS NOT, WAS NOT, WAS NOT, ABOUT ABORTION. IT WAS ABOUT PRIVACY IN MEDICAL DECISIONS.
It is so very simple.
IF YOU ARE AGAINST ABORTION, DON'T HAVE ONE. IN THE MEANTIME, STOP TRYING TO FORCE YOUR BELIEFS ON ME. MY FAMILY LEFT ENGLAND TO GET AWAY FROM YOU SELF-RIGHTEOUS, SANCTIMOUS, MIGUIDED, MORONIC, A**HOLES.
A commenter on my blog lives near Wasilla, Alaska. He reports that the high school teaches comprehensive sex ed: birth control, etc. That is state policy in Alaska.
Teaching about birth control is slightly more effective in reducing pregnancy than abstinence-only but many, many kids ignore what they hear in school (and at home).
Sarah Palin wasn't a member of the Alaska Independence Party. The guy who said she was now says he made a mistake: Her husband was a member. She wasn't listed as a member. He was. Obsidian Wings has more at http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/09/palin-and-the-a.html
I'm distressed to see the sexist (and crackpot) responses to Sarah Palin. It's entirely fair to conclude that she's not ready to be one 72-year-old's heartbeat away from the presidency. To criticize her as a bad mother because of her daughter's pregnancy is weird. Barack Obama had it right: Kids are off limits.
I suspect Palin thought Bristol's pregnancy would not be the subject of national hysteria when she accepted the number two spot on the ticket. How could she have foreseen the bizarre rumors that the mother of a Down's Syndrome baby must be a teenager not a 44-year-old? How could she have known that the media that ignored John Edwards' inability to use birth control with his mistress would obsess over a 17-year-old girl and her 18-year-old boyfriend.
What do you call the moron who teaches only abstinence to a 16 yr old?? A. GRANDMA!!!! Hey Ms. Palin...How about you finish the job you started 20 yrs ago, you know..being a MOTHER. Rushing to the alter because of a pregnancy is very very 1970 and I don't want my Vice President being 38 yrs behing the times. But hey, can't wait to see many more pictures of Palin and the mangled deer/bears she cant wait to rip apart. Perhaps if she'd been mothering and not murdering things would have gone better.
What do you call the moron who teaches only abstinence to a 16 yr old?? A. GRANDMA!!!! Hey Ms. Palin...How about you finish the job you started 20 yrs ago, you know..being a MOTHER. Rushing to the alter because of a pregnancy is very very 1970 and I don't want my Vice President being 38 yrs behing the times. But hey, can't wait to see many more pictures of Palin and the mangled deer/bears she cant wait to rip apart. Perhaps if she'd been mothering and not murdering things would have gone better.
Clinton's lie harmed no one. G Dub's lies have killed thousands. How's that for the math?
Clinton's lie harmed no one. G Dub's lies have killed thousands. How's that for the math?
MY FAMILY LEFT ENGLAND TO GET AWAY FROM YOU SELF-RIGHTEOUS, SANCTIMOUS, MIGUIDED, MORONIC, A**HOLES.
Well, my family left England because they were a bunch of self-righteous, sanctimonious, misguided, moronic A**holes, known at the time as Puritans. So there.
As for "privacy in medical decisions," if you somehow convinced a doctor to amputate a perfectly healthy left arm, I'm pretty sure the licensing board would have something to say about it, "privacy" be damned.
It's always interesting to see how Democrats' underlying principles drift depending on who's running for what. Now I can refuse to hire a woman with four kids - on the grounds that she should be home raising them - and be clean with "progressives". Great!
By the way - Bill Clinton was impeached for lying to a grand jury, not for getting a BJ from an intern - and that was only because of Republicans. Bill Clinton's activities, including committing perjury before a grand jury, were most certainly okay with Democrats. Don't make me google it up - it would bring the internets to a halt.
In fact, it used to be that a man in power hitting on a woman with less power in the workplace was called misogyny and was considered brutish and despicable. But apparently the power differential between the leader of the free world and an unpaid intern isn't great enough to be considered abusive or opportunistic. Of course, once again, that depends entirely on the party the great leader belongs to. We're principled about that.
And now the actions of candidates' children are wholely relevant to evaluating a candidate. That wasn't the case for Gore, nor is it now the case for Biden (21 year old was arrested for obstructing a police officer and his son has shady dealings with lobbyists - was it bad parenting and indicative of bad judgment?). But - let's all say it together - these principles only apply depending on the party of the candidate.
It used to be, when Clinton was running in '92 that, in John Kerry's words, "it doesn't matter whether or how you served", and Vietnam was a criminal and dishonorable enterprise. Then, when Kerry ran, it was paramount that the CIC had to have combat experience in order to be fully aware of what their decisions caused to those who served and fighting in Vietnam was a brave defense of the nation. Now that our candidate has no military service, we take the old playbook off the shelves to see what our principles are again, and find that - lo and behold, it says right here - military service is no longer a qualifier for being the CIC.
Man, is this whole "principle" thing handy or what???
Ummm...
Study after study has shown that abstinence education does not work at all, and that comprehensive sex education actually reduces significantly the number of teen pregnancies. Are you not aware of that? Perhaps you should look these things up when you don't know, instead of making them up.
"How about you finish the job you started 20 yrs ago, you know..being a MOTHER. "
....
"I don't want my Vice President being 38 yrs behing the times"
hahahaha. That's some great parody.
It's always interesting to see how Democrats' underlying principles drift depending on who's running for what. Now I can refuse to hire a woman with four kids - on the grounds that she should be home raising them - and be clean with "progressives". Great!
By the way - Bill Clinton was impeached for lying to a grand jury, not for getting a BJ from an intern - and that was only because of Republicans. Bill Clinton's activities, including committing perjury before a grand jury, were most certainly okay with Democrats. Don't make me google it up - it would bring the internets to a halt.
In fact, it used to be that a man in power hitting on a woman with less power in the workplace was called misogyny and was considered brutish and despicable. But apparently the power differential between the leader of the free world and an unpaid intern isn't great enough to be considered abusive or opportunistic. Of course, once again, that depends entirely on the party the great leader belongs to. We're principled about that.
And now the actions of candidates' children are wholely relevant to evaluating a candidate. That wasn't the case for Gore, nor is it now the case for Biden (21 year old was arrested for obstructing a police officer and his son has shady dealings with lobbyists - was it bad parenting and indicative of bad judgment?). But - let's all say it together - these principles only apply depending on the party of the candidate.
It used to be, when Clinton was running in '92 that, in John Kerry's words, "it doesn't matter whether or how you served", and Vietnam was a criminal and dishonorable enterprise. Then, when Kerry ran, it was paramount that the CIC had to have combat experience in order to be fully aware of what their decisions caused to those who served and fighting in Vietnam was a brave defense of the nation. Now that our candidate has no military service, we take the old playbook off the shelves to see what our principles are again, and find that - lo and behold, it says right here - military service is no longer a qualifier for being the CIC.
Man, is this whole "principle" thing handy or what???
If she does not believe in contraception... what happens if she gets pregnant while in office as president if McCain dies (72 years)? Will she be able to make important decisions that affect the our country? It's already bad enough that she has a lot on her plate now.
I think we're seeing the Democrats put together a pretty compelling list of good reasons why women should be kept out of all sorts of positions in the military now.
I mean, we can't have a young woman in a critical position, where lives can be at stake, getting pregnant and not being able to fulfill her important duties. Because, after all, we won't encourage her to abstain - since we're not all stupid and stuff - and we know that contraception sometimes fails.
So now we're developing some good reasons to keep women from those combat roles the feminist movement has been demanding be available to them for all these years. Just like during the Kerry candidacy we developed a compelling argument against civilian control of the military.
my friend wrote a well-reasoned blog post on this...worth checking out:
http://www.pushback.org/2008/09/03/megan-mcardles-confusing-take-on-sex-ed/
Talk about a rant.
This awesome lady is will get my vote. She is intelligent, energetic, tough, beautiful, honest, clean and stands for everything the majority of Americans do.
Albeit, Obama and Biden are both full of it, and extremely liberal, Mrs. Palin is the exact opposite. She is Pro-Life, which is what we need in our country.. a leader with Christian moral values. That's where it starts... with the core beliefs.
Obama is death. Biden is a loser and a liar.
McCain and Palin will WIN in November. Obama is nothing more than driftwood and will fade into obscurity after the election.
Everyone I know loves Mrs. Palin and she will draw enough votes to win on her own.. the RNC does not need Hillary votes to swing the election. Because Mrs. Palin is the real-deal (finally) the Republicans will again win the presidency.
The attacks on Palin expose the hypocrisy and misogyny of the left, and the complete uselessness of the Media. My response - as a registered D - is to put my money and my vote ob the Palin ticket.
I am at the point where this continued obsession with Ms Palin, her uterus, her baby (or babies..or conspiracy to hide someone elses baby) and her daughter..the boy friend..and on and on..has reminded be just how horribly intolerant the left really is.
I am supporting Mr Obama but my support is tenuous asit is many of us who don't care for Mr McCain. But i warn you people on the left. Keep up these absolutely hideous attacks on Ms Palin and your vagina obsession and you will witness a backlash like no other. You can't win on this.
Sullivan purports to be some kind of conservative, yet has completely swooned when it comes to Obama. Does he really think he will get small goverment, low taxes if Obama is elected? If Obama is elected, I foresee another disillusionment in store for Andrew - just like the last time he swooned with Bush and joined the cheerleading for the Iraq war. He will discover, to his _horror_, that Obama is a fraud, a Chicago machine politican.. that he is a through and through liberal with no real interest in working with the other side. Just like with the Iraq war, we will hear the lame 'but I had no idea...I was misled..' type excuses.
This issue isn't in the news because it's a way for the Obama supporters to criticize Palin. It's news because she's a PREGNANT 17 YEAR OLD! If Obama had a pregnant teen-aged daughter, that would be on the news. Hell, you don't even have to be a politician to get your pregnant daughter on the news. Celebrities like Jamie Lynn Spears get in the news all the time and their parents aren't running for any kind of office.
Also, before you go off at the mouth about what abstinence only education vs. comprehensive education does, do your research. It's proven through studies that abstinence only education doesn't reduce the risk of unplanned pregnancies or make teens wait to have sex, BUT comprehensive education does. And how do you know that Palin's daughter didn't have all the information she needed about safe sex? Maybe she goes to a school that has abstinence only education health classes, and maybe Sarah Palin did make some mistakes as a parent and maybe one of those mistakes happened to be being dillusional and she thought her daughter wouldn't need to know about safe sex because, gasp, she's supposed to be a good daughter brought up in ABSTINENCE ONLY EDUCATION.
Ian,
Thank you so much for revealing events from future land. You are so wise. By the way, I have so enjoyed the small government our current administration employs. It's just so very cozy.
To the rest of Obama blamers,
Where is your evidence that he's personally involved in the coverage of it in the media? All of you are grossly overstating the attention its even getting. Ridiculous. The girl had sex, got pregnant and her mother was nominated for VP, did you think it wouldn't generate attention in the media? Get real..
Megan - You could give yourself an enormous credibility boost if you immediately revoked, or at least qualified, your point about abstinence-only education.
I know it's hard to do, because so many commenters have been less-than-genial. But your contention that the jury's still out on ab-only-ed is just not a sustainable argument.
....just add a post update that starts "I stand by the core of my original points, but after further review, I may have been hasty in saying....blah blah abstinence-only education...blah blah. It still doesn't excuse those who have viciously attacked Governor Palin blah blah"
Doing something like that - owning up to your error rather than hiding from it, is the hallmark of a serious person and an intellectually honest blogger.
Look, we live in a divided country - we really live in two country's, one Republican and one Democratic. It's unfortunate, and with the ease of moving that people now enjoy it's bound to get worse. Unless of course, the next President can unify the country around common goals. But politicians aren't bipartisan by nature - they're partisan. And regrettably the line between politics and culture is becoming almost invisible. It's not easy for the common man or woman to be moderate. After all, we want our views to be our anthem, we want our dreams fulfilled, our opinions heard, our goals achieved. It's easier to pick up and move to a state where more agree with you than disagree than stay and moderate your views. Moderation is the enemy of good fun. We don't like it, and we avoid it as often as we can.
There's a new fan and supporter website up for Sarah at:
http://www.sarahpalin.me
It has a bio,photos,contact information and free Sarah Palin computer wallpaper.
Check it out.
A Poetic Tribute to Mrs. Palin
Here’s to you Governor Palin,
Whose daughter’s been gettin’ some nailin’!
“At least she’s no lez!”
That’s what Bill Bennett says.
“Now, Vegas is where I’m high-tailin.’”
So far she's told repeated lies about herself and resorted to simplistic smear tactics instead of real analysis of the issues.
1- She claims she is against lobbyists, but the first thing she did as mayor was hire a lobby firm.
2- She says she was against the "bridge to nowhere" yet she was a supporter of Ted Stevens and simply changed the wording after that idea became unpopular.
3- She says she helped America by getting a gas pipeline begun, but she doesn't mention that she gave the contracts to FOREIGN companies instead of American ones.
It goes on and on. This person is a complete phony and has been created to serve a purpose in this election. I only hope the voters are not stupid enough to fall for this fakery.
Here are the issues for me.
It is very hard to make the case that she is qualified to be president, which should be the first requirement.
She's announced on Friday. On Sunday, the pregnancy thing comes out. McCain says she was vetted.
Either she wasn't and this is way too cavaliere on McCains part with him being 72 and seventeen different kinds of cancer or....
she was, and the McCain team sees the pregnancy as an election plus.
And if McCain thought it wouldn't come out (no pun intended) or be discussed then he's a pinhead.
Remember, after she was picked, we got not one press interview with her at least til the republicans had time to feed her 2 tons of talking points. We still haven't heard from her in an impromptu setting. Yeah I'm sure she wrote every word of her speech.
This smells like another scripted pile by the people who brought you the Iraq war rationale.
Sarah Palin and her husban are failures as parents. It's that simple. They failed to instill in their daughther the basic fundemental value of self control. Their teenaged daughter's out of wedlock pregnancy is not just a family matter; it's much more: it shows that Sarah Palin and her husban neglected their primary responsibility as a parents to educate their daughter as to the dos and don'ts of life,... and it shows that Sarah Palin is not qualified to lead our country.
Public officials and community leaders through out this country sit down with their teen age kids from time to talk about the facts of life about being a "public kid". There are certain things they can't do...dodge the draft, get arrested or get pregnant out of wedlock.
"PKs" can speed, get drunk, and do all manner of questionable things, but they can't violate the basic values of society without their actions damaging the reputation of their parents.
No, Gov. Palin and her husband are not bad parents because their daughter got pregnant. And no, Bristol didn't get pregnant because her mom thinks it's a good idea to include abstinence education in school. (How do you know that Bristol wasn't using birth control, and how do you know that Gov. Palin never talks to her kids about birth control?)
And no, daughter-being-pregnant doesn't have anything to do with whether Sarah Palin will be a good VP. (Look at all the stuff Al Gore's son got into when Gore was running for Pres.)
And I wish everyone would stop with this crap about baby Trig not being Sarah Palin's kid. Have you not seen the photos of her while she was pregnant?!
And Sarah Palin is not a phony. She supported the "bridge to nowhere" because there was future development planned for that area, and when she found out about Ted Stevens' corruption in regards to the project, she rejected it.
Sarah Palin, along with a few others, DID take on the corrupt political mahinery of Alaska (almost all of it Republican), and has gotten corrupt politicians fined and fired.
She is a true crusader. Hillary's Communications Dir. Howard Wolfson couldn't have said it better tonight: Dems are right to be afraid of her; they need to be very afraid of her.
Palin's speech may resonate with the emotion and confidence of someone who talks to the world as if she is talking to a small town - because she's from a very small town and has frankly never been cut down to size by living in a larger metropolis of millions of people like many Americans - and the reality is she lacks the gravitas, foreign policy experience, and national experience to protect the welfare of 301,139,947 people.
Any high school teenager who has no concept of his or her vulnerability in the world (because he's never been out there, let alone out of the state) could have delivered that speech confidently.
Palin simply has no concept of the scope of what is at stake. If she did, she couldn't possibly even accept the position in good faith. There are thousands of Americans who have more foreign policy experience than Palin. And she doesn't have the support of international leaders like Obama has, two national bestselling books discussing domestic and international issues like Obama has, or even a graduate degree for that matter.
Senator Obama was very gracious when he urged people to leave Palin's family out of the public square. He was very gracious when he said on 60 Minutes that he wished Palin luck, but not too much luck, with a smile. Palin frankly was not gracious - which is particularly surprising from a new comer to national politics.
I've lived in liberal communities and conservative ones. Let's not forget that the Republican convention highlighted two black women - both adopted and brought to America - as its ode to multiculturalism. And therein lies the hypocrisy of conservatives. They'll travel across the seas to bring home and adopt little black girls from a foreign country, but they can't walk 5 minutes to the other side of town where equally underprivileged minorities live and they would never adopt one of them who might be up for adoption.
No, they'd rather go overseas and bring black people back here, or go overseas and assist AIDS but not here. It's very disturbing really. Don't get me wrong, that's not bad work, but it speaks to someone who is profoundly uncomfortable with dealing with the realities of the multiculturalism right here at home, and it shows up with few minority speakers at the convention.
Like they're ancestors who brought slaves to America, there still remain some who believe liberty must be imposed on others and black people must be picked up and brought to this country and then even paraded about on stage like a trophy.
I will make an absolute statement: every nasty charge leveled at "liberals" or "conservatives" can be reversed and made against the "beloved party" of the poster. This is ridiculous. I can almost see the spittle flying from the screaming mouths about this. Obama, Palin, McCain, Biden... blah blah blah. In the grand scheme of things - IT DOES NOT MATTER. Jesus, you people. Did the Earth hurtle into the sun when Clinton was elected? Bush? Get over yourselves. You are projecting way too much into who is president. Accept that you don't KNOW the candidates and likely NEVER will. You don't KNOW Obama - you have projected on to him so F**king much that he could ascend into heaven upon swearing in and many of his supporters would be disaffected over how he didn't "deliver" - (what? why - EVERYTHING to EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE! - yeah, that's gonna happen.) McCain could win and be a fine president - but hurt feelings over not getting your way will lead to spoilt little snits until Obama de-scends from Heaven again. (just in time for his believers to attempt to crucify him - "How dare you let McCain win!!!")
You whiny nit-picking little bitches will get the crappy leaders you so richly deserve. Now who is running on the fascist ticket?(could be Obama, could be McCain.......ha ha ha suckers - you won't know until it is too late.)
Californio - you're free to link to, or cut and paste, any comments from the Obama/Biden ticket where they've referred to Republicans as "the angry right", "fetus worshippers", "religious nutbags" or anything of the like. The fact is, all of that demonizing personal attack stuff is coming from one side, and one side only. Fred Thompson waved fetuses overhead in his speech as red meat for the crowd. Dear Leader himself seemed to think that McCain's most salient qualification is that he will not give in to "the angry left".
That's all these mofos have, and it's all they've EVER had. Try though you might to equate Democratic criticism of Republican policies with the personal attacks we see coming from the Republicans themselves, it doesn't wash with anyone but the 29 percenters who eat that stuff up. Everyone else can see the difference, even if you can't.
First off, please do your homework on the failure of abstinence-only education. As for the efficacy of sex education, frankly, we will never know because it cannot be implemented to any meaningful degree due to social conservative opposition (don't tell kids how to protect themselves and they won't do it - yeeeeaaaah...)
Second of all, the hypocrisy of the GOP and it's religious right base is mind-blowing. If Senator Obama had a seventeen-year-old daughter get pregnant out of wedlock, the GOP and its base would be apoplectic with rage, decrying the harlot and demanding that her father withdraw from the Presidential race. Mind you, I believe that James Dobson is secretly tightening up his cilice so as to not blurt out 'Mother of a whore!', but the point is that the base of the party had Sarah Palin literally crammed down their throat at the last minute and in the interest of party unity they will acquiesce.
But Sarah Palin is not qualified to be President-in-waiting. As for this whole conspiracy theory about Trig, I find it hard to believe (although this is Alaska and I don't think that the media would be too difficult to deceive). If it is her baby, good for her. If it truly her grandson, then good for her to take on such a responsibility - just don't lie about it. As a follow-up, if the GOP loses this election this shotgun marriage will never happen. If they win, it will still not happen and will be forgotten.
But frankly, Megan, talking about the family issue and her role as a mother is completely appropriate. I have three children under seven and with a full-time job it's insane. Regardless of whether I am qualified for the job of VP, I would never agree to serve and disrupt my family to such a degree. Politicians are different animals than us common folk, but what does it say about Sarah Palin that her family comes second to her ambition? I have known a number of CEO's and other Captains of Industry who have ambition to spare and money to burn. And they need every penny so they can afford the best reform schools to send their dysfunctional children to. So, yes, I would ask how she proposes to balance five children with the demands of the Vice Presidency - that is not sexist, it's PRO-family.
Look, can a person just point out the fact that if this were one of Obama's daughters the howls of outrage from the Social Conservatives would absolutely lift the rafters?
I'm not here to judge HER (other than the "wisdom" of taking a long, LONG flight AFTER having broken her water), just saying that the Republicans have done a commendable job turning a real sow's ear into a faux silk purse. But then they've had so much experience doing that lately!
Mark, I would like to assume that your post was some kind of sly caricature, but I kind of doubt it.
"If Senator Obama had a seventeen-year-old daughter get pregnant out of wedlock, the GOP and its base would be apoplectic with rage, decrying the harlot and demanding that her father withdraw from the Presidential race."
Actually no, they wouldn't. The whole point of that Bible thing is that everyone is a sinner ("except this guy" -- The Simpsons). Teen pregnancy happens, even in church communities. The teens who get pregnant are neither stoned nor cast out. They're welcomed with open and loving arms as people who made mistakes.
"As for this whole conspiracy theory about Trig, I find it hard to believe (although this is Alaska and I don't think that the media would be too difficult to deceive)."
Hard to believe? It's been proven false. It's time to let go of that last bit of hope that it will turn out to be true. And by the way, your condescension to people who aren't from metropolitan areas is what Republicans talk about when they refer to elitists on the left.
"But frankly, Megan, talking about the family issue and her role as a mother is completely appropriate.... Politicians are different animals than us common folk, but what does it say about Sarah Palin that her family comes second to her ambition?"
Wow. Did you really just make that argument? That Sarah Palin is not qualified to be VP because she should be at home taking care of her family? How interesting that you didn't make that argument about Obama or Biden. And why is that? Is it because Sarah Palin should be cooking and sweeping and barefoot and pregnant?
If people made this argument about Hillary Clinton, the heads of liberal pundits would pop off. But I guess sexism is ok when it's directed at Republicans.
Mark, I would like to assume that your post was some kind of sly caricature, but I kind of doubt it.
"If Senator Obama had a seventeen-year-old daughter get pregnant out of wedlock, the GOP and its base would be apoplectic with rage, decrying the harlot and demanding that her father withdraw from the Presidential race."
Actually no, they wouldn't. The whole point of that Bible thing is that everyone is a sinner ("except this guy" -- The Simpsons). Teen pregnancy happens, even in church communities. The teens who get pregnant are neither stoned nor cast out. They're welcomed with open and loving arms as people who made mistakes.
"As for this whole conspiracy theory about Trig, I find it hard to believe (although this is Alaska and I don't think that the media would be too difficult to deceive)."
Hard to believe? It's been proven false. It's time to let go of that last bit of hope that it will turn out to be true. And by the way, your condescension to people who aren't from metropolitan areas is what Republicans talk about when they refer to elitists on the left.
"But frankly, Megan, talking about the family issue and her role as a mother is completely appropriate.... Politicians are different animals than us common folk, but what does it say about Sarah Palin that her family comes second to her ambition?"
Wow. Did you really just make that argument? That Sarah Palin is not qualified to be VP because she should be at home taking care of her family? How interesting that you didn't make that argument about Obama or Biden. And why is that? Is it because Sarah Palin should be cooking and sweeping and barefoot and pregnant?
If people made this argument about Hillary Clinton, the heads of liberal pundits would pop off. But I guess sexism is ok when it's directed at Republicans.
"I'm not here to judge HER (other than the "wisdom" of taking a long, LONG flight AFTER having broken her water)..."
Her water hadn't broken. She was leaking amniotic fluid. Not even close to the same thing. In fact, she didn't give birth until the next day ... *after her doctor induced labor*. So we're not talking about an emergency situation here.
The sheer volume of disinformation and sexist arguments being thrown at this woman is staggering.
AMERICA WANTS PROOF OF TRIGS TRUE PARENTS!!!! WHY???? IF THIS IS A COVER UP FOR BRISTOL'S HOME BOUND IGNORANCE OF PROMISCUITY, THEN ABSOLUTE DECEIT RUNS THROUGH THE VEINS OF SARAH PALIN. DOES AMERICA WANT THAT IN THE WHITE HOUSE? I THINK NOT. WE NEED TRUTH ABOVE ALL ELSE. SHOW US A BIRTH CERTIFICATE AND BURY THIS SCENTED SCANDAL FOR GOOD.
The main thing that bothers me about Sarah Palin, not to mention her false comments at the RNC.... How could any pro life mother or any mother subject a four month old baby with special needs to a roaring, negative, crowd of people at the RNC. This is not a healthy situation for a new born. I don't think they would have allowed any other mother in the convention with a new born child. To me this borders on child abuse. I hope the baby had earplugs. What were the parents thinking, or are they more concerned about the political gains of showing the child in public would bring? Trig should have been in a safe nurturing environment.
Bill Clinton paid for his misconduct- he was impeached remember? What the GOP won't hold its people to the same standards regarding lying and sex? This is the same moral hypocracy, the same double standards that we have all come to expect from the GOP.
Surely objections to Clinton's impeachment for lying in a deposition about a financial scandal in Arkansas to lawyers using grand jury testimony leaked illegally by Kenneth Starr's chamber were not condoning his actions, but obeying the dictates of the constitution, which says the grounds for such impeachment are 'high crimes and misdemeanours' which in the parlance of the time meant treasonous or similar behaviour. But we saw in Florida how strict construction becomes deconstruction when it suits the right wing.
The public, by the way, saw through the charade, and support for Clinton stayed above 60% throughout. Then they elected Gore president.
We must not elect a weak leader in this time. We have troops in Iraq right now fighting to serve our country. Don't let this be another Vietnam. Don't let our nation be turned over into the hands of someone who, though sincere, is sincerely misguided, and is, what I believe, a blank slate in the hands of puppeteers who would propel this nation into DEPTHS of darkness, and entrench us in corruption and danger we can't even begin to fathom nor understand. For those of us who still believe in the necessity of, the sacrifice in, and the commitment to VICTORIOUS wars - We MUST WIN!!! We MUST act now!!!
We have two heroes on the ticket - and only two. I see the good heart in John McCain, and the willingness to truly serve, even though differentiating from the conventional "party wisdom" (I truly do NOT agree with him on every point). But I am glad that he still retains some of that old school "get-it-done", "don't-give-up-even-through-unbelievable-opposition" attitude that has stuck out to me in a man, whose lifetime of experience, sacrifice, and perserverance have crafted a warrior.
Speaking of conserving energy and rescuing the economy, check out the modest stage used at the DNC - it looks like it came straight out of Vegas. Now you know where your tax dollars are going. You won't have to worry about anything if we have a liberal, *ahem* socialist White House - the government promises to care of everything for you. If that's before or AFTER we get blown up with nukes, you'd have to ask them.
What IS important, is that we learn to conserve, be modest with spending, and take care for our decisions - build a fence at the top of the hill, instead of putting an ambulance at the bottom of the hill. Also, FOLLOW THROUGH - don't start out on something without the intention to finish it - and finish it right. DON'T LET OUR TROOPS COME HOME IN DISGRACE, as if their sacrifice has been an unavoidable mistake because of the president (oh, please). God forbid.
Every bit of everyone's efforts count in this war, and this IS a vital war, and WE MUST WIN. We must not switch horses mid-stream, switch plans, and decide to put better jobs, healthcare reform, and the lovely environment above COMPLETION and VICTORY in our worldwide battle for national safety and security. In a hierarchy of psychological human needs, safety and security are fundamentally at the base of the pyramid. Being able to have better jobs and more affordable schooling are not even the third or fourth layer up!
And, Lord have mercy, left-extremists are scared to death of Sarah Palin. Well, she's confident, she derides all of their faux stereotypes - and even better, she's very tricky to attack (unless you want to be go through torturous and painstaking explanations the the 58% of Americans who LOVE Sarah to death - or look sexist - or look spurned - or look like you're jealous, which you probably are - or look like you really don't have the best interests of women in mind (maybe just yourself), after all this IS a victory for women all across the board). She tops Obama and McCain, both at 57% approval .. Biden's down there at 46%, honorable mention. As Newt Gingrich said, liberals MUST destroy Sarah, because she belies all of their most integral messages - which aren't true, of course. And she proves the opposite, which makes them look TERRIBLY bad.
Because Bill Clinton using a white house intern like a cheap whore...That didn't stop the Republicans and the media from doing the EXACT same things to him.
Because Sarah Palin is a bad mother? No, I wouldn't say she's a bad mother. I'd say if it happened to a "liberal" politician, the conservative base and bloggers like yourself would throw rocks from your pedestals and SAY s/he is a bad parent.
Because Sarah Palin is a social conservative... See my last point. By the way, we're all hypocrites.
Because Sarah Palin made the decision to keep the Down's baby a selling point? This one is more complicated than I can get into with a one-liner. It's one of many reasons, which, added together, make me think she shouldn't have accepted the job. I really feel she is putting personal ambition above family, which is something I categorically denounce.
Because Sarah Palin should have encouraged her daughter to get an abortion? Absolutely not. But it should be her daughter's choice, which I believe it is. Although again, referring to my last point, I think she should have considered her daughter's exposure to the media before accepting the gig. I wouldn't do it to my child. Not for all the power in America.
Because social conservatives are against sex education emphasizing birth control? and yours would be a compelling argument if conservatives weren't so staunchly against teaching anything BUT abstinence. What the hell is wrong with teaching both?
Because all the hyperventilating Obama supporters pretending that they are genuinely morally outraged are willing to say anything to get him elected, even if if means prying into the personal life of a seventeen year old girl who has just been thrust into adulthood in a humiliatingly public way? Speaking of "Oh, Rights..." Like if Obama had a teenage daughter who turned up pregnant it wouldn't be the UTTER focus of you next 7 posts. See: We're all hypocrites.
But the people criticizing her are making me considerably less interested in voting for Obama. If this sort of deranged logic produces unwavering support for Obama, I have to question my own judgement.
Yeah, because Obama has the total secret control of the National Media and the Democratic party. None of these people are human beings of their own free will to do or say as they choose. It's all the almighty Obama's plan. How's that for deranged logic? Feel free to visit my blog if you'd like to counter any of my points. Looking forward to it, and I hope I opened your eyes, even a little bit, even on just one issue. http://daydreamed.blogspot.com
Ben
PalinBoy.com - MUST SEE!!!! PalinBoy.com!
I am a complete sexist..NOT..she's such a brilliant scholar and I worship her royalness! LOL-Sarah Palin is a utter joke and the only reason your talking about her daughter when 99% of liberals don't really care is b/c there is no way in hell she can when on the issues. Checkout PalinBoy.com FLOODED WITH HITS.. Parody video in production.
PalinBoy.com - MUST SEE!!!! PalinBoy.com !
I am a complete sexist..NOT..she's such a brilliant scholar and I worship her royalness! LOL-Sarah Palin is a utter joke and the only reason your talking about her daughter when 99% of liberals don't really care is b/c there is no way in hell she can when on the issues. Checkout PalinBoy.com FLOODED WITH HITS.. Parody video in production.
Several commenters said Sarah Palin was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party. She wasn't, she has always been a registered Republican. Her husband was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party for several years before also registering as a Republican, and she has spoken to them.
How about because falsification of a birth record is a crime?
How about because falsification of medical records are also against the law?
How about because making a false insurance claim is also against the law?
Why don't people think about the legalities of Palin's actions?
People obviously did that with Clinton, but aparantly Palin gets a pass.