I think that the whole pregnancy thing should not be discussed at all, not part of what I am interested, but...
1-Who else thinks that the McCain people planted the 'she is covering up for her daughter' rumor
or
2-Is in fact covering up and the 5 months-pregnant is a red herring?
Finally whats up with her kid's names?
I hate this enquirer type thoughts, but with this woman I am afraid we will see more of this... But I will stop it, it is silly and I wouldnt like it done to my side.
A lot of people throw out Dukakis, Harriet Miers, and Clarence Thomas, but to describe Palin, I think we need to look at her Monica Goodlin tendencies.
I do have a strong feeling I disagree with you on this one wonderk....
If parents are so on the dark about their kids and what they are up to then we have a problem. Actually we have a big problem and that is parents are taking the easy out just like our beauty queen. We don't need her family setting examples for kids having kids. She is not what this country needs in anyway shape or form. It is wrong to brush this issue off as oh well!
Oh I did not mean to insinuate that that's the kind of example we want to set....or that teenage pregnancy is OK....in fact, the first thing that came to mind for me was "great, Britney Spears' mom is the Repub VP nominee". However, as a female who was once (still?) terrified of pregnancy, those are probably the kindest words that you can hope for from your mother in such a situation. My mother is crazy and not supportive at all, so I appreciate her response to the whole thing.
I think ultimately this will turn off a subset of the far-right-wing evangelicals who preach for abstinence and who think she's a bad parent. So be it. I appreciate Obama's response to the issue:
"I've heard some of the news. I've said before I think families are off limits, children limits. It has no relevance," Obama said. "I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories. My mom had me when she was 18. And how families deal with issues of children shouldn't be part of our politics."
i'd agree with obama's response too. regardless of what any of us think, this can not and should not be fodder for stumping.
sadly - obama knows (or at least i know) that this is ultimately an opportunity for the GOP, like any other hurdle, to provide another wedge issue, to win by casting light on the snobbery of the democrats.
i'm worried that this situation, and the liberal elite recoiling in horror at the thought, will actually turn more "family values" voters into palin fans than not.
in their inimitably twisted fashion, the far-right/evangelical voters will conjoin supporting sarah palin with "true" feminism, and will convince themselves that the dems grouching is all just a bunch of intolerance.
they will again claim to be the "tolerant" party who's truly the more "socially accepting" one, as long as you're not gay, black, jewish (except the israelis, we like them...lieberman too) oriental, arab, indian or god forbid...mexican.
be very, very careful, people. don't spring the trap.
Yet nobody in the (supposedly liberal) media has pointed out that VP-screechy not only CHOSE not to have an abortion, but also allowed her daughter to choose whether or not to have an abortion even after she said she disagreed with the Alaska Supreme court when they stuck down the parental notification law. I would like a pundit to ask her why she thinks that she and her family are allowed choices she would forbid others to exercise, and if there are any others rights or choices out there she also would to reserve only for herself and her kin.
She chose not to have an abortion, based on her faith and her family - great. That's her choice. Not mine, not the government's either. That's part of having a representational government - even if they haven't been all that representational of the majority of the people for the last 30 years, and the last 8 you've needed at least a million dollars just to wake them up from their drunken slumber.
But basically, I think the fallout is that prior to Obama's choice every damn pundit out there was saying that "the choice for vice-president is emblematic of how they will lead in the white house" and Palin shows that McCain's instincts as a "maverick" are lousy to dangerous.
Criticize Obama for being too inexperienced, and then pick a VP with LESS experience.
Rail against "[Republican] business as usual" only to find out that she was as cozy as a mayor of 5000 could be with Stevens and the bridge to nowhere.
To all you non-fundamentalist republicans out there, really? Really? I mean I am sure there are Democrats out there who if put on the ticket I would hold my nose to vote for them, but if they then ran a campaign like McCain has ran his, I'd leave the presidential mark off my ballot in the fall.
Ever since the announcement of Sarah Palin I've been kinda walking around stunned. I'm not angry per say at the blantant strategic choice of McCain's pick: I'm just slightly annoyed and completely curious if he REALLY thinks that women are that naive as to vote for him b/c he chose a woman for VP, even though she/he do not share the same ideological values. If so I pity the man.
And now that it's been devulged that Palin's daughter is actgually 5 months pregant I am truly do believe that McCain is slightly off his rocker and thoroughly believe his campaign people never completely vetted her in the first place. I think it's excellent that Palin and her husband are supporting their daughter in her decision to keep the baby. I also agree with snook that this setting another bad example to teenager that getting pregnant at such a yound age is in fact OK.
I really admire Obama and his statement. Family issues concerning the children need to be left out of the race.
i threw this question out on another thread but seeing how this one has more traction....
does anyone think 'levi' might be 18 or older? i'm really curious because, if so, he would have committed a felony under alaskan law.
if he did, surely gov. palin and her husband knew that fact, right? and, if so, why - as an officer of the law - did she not report him to the alaskan authorities? surely her constitutional duties would require her to do so, right? if she didn't, why does she think her own family situation is above the law? they incarcerated a young man here in atlanta for far less.
wouldn't it speak volumes about gov. palin's integrity and ethics if indeed she decided not to report the young man? sure, i get in a 'real world' sense why she'd want to spare her daughter and the young man any further, but what's the difference between this and trying to protect a member of the administration from a crime, simply because they're on the 'right' side?
mark it down - she may lose the nomination over this...
Yeah, good call. That's not relevant, lets focus on the real issues here, like energy policy, foreign policy, and the economy... I really don't think it's in anybody's interest to get distracted from the issues...
While I agree that the question of the activities of the daughter (and really, her own personal life) are not to be dwelled upon as an electoral issue (on the web where people bloviate, chatter away.) but my issue is that she wants rights for herself and her family which she would, given the opportunity, restrict others from having. And that is a legitimate question.
And that's not Obama's place to question her, but a journalist's place. I think they might be extinct, but here's hoping one shows up between now and the election.
My feeling is, for Obama, the family's off limits. But for the press, please, go to town!
This is all about McCain's judgment and ability to lead the country. If he couldn't even choose a running mate without vetting her first, and chose (by all accounts) in a hurry, without research, then what kind of impulsive, trigger-finger president would he be?
I hope all the most sordid and unfortunate stuff regarding Palin gets blasted all over the media. I think it's worth recounting again and again.
To wit:
• Governor for less than two years.
•Governor of a state whose population is roughly equal to the entire city of Portland, OR.
•Prior to that, Mayor of a town of 7,000.
• Almost recalled as mayor of a town of 7,000, because she fired two people who hadn't voted for her.
• As Governor, caused her ex-brother in law to be fired because he was no longer her brother in law. And also fired his employer, when his employer refused to fire the ex-brother in law.
• Pro-life even in cases of rape or incest. Might, might, support abortion if the life of the mother is threatened. Wouldn't support abortion even if her own daughter had been raped.
•Daughter is 17 and pregnant. Not married to the father, and was 16 when impregnated. Parents support her choice to have baby.
•Palin's latest child is half-rumored to actually be her daughter's (I know the point above makes this one suspect.)
•Had last baby at age 44, despite the fact that any neonatologist would say this is an extremely bad idea, as pregnacies over 35 are considered high risk, and pregnancies over 40 extremely high risk (1 in 300 babies have Downs Syndrome. Many more have other complications.)
• Believes that creationism should be taught in schools.
• Seems not to believe in evolution.
• Was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, which advocates Alaska's secession from the rest of the United States. (How this alone wouldn't disqualify her from being VP is beyond me. She wanted to not be a part of the US? Does she hate America?)
•Husband once arrested for drunk driving.
• Big supporter of uber-corrupt Ted Stevens, despite her running on an "anti-corruption" platform.
• Actually supported the bridge to nowhere, until she was pressured to vote against it. (Her seeming to be against it was one of the main reasons McCain liked her.)
• McCain had spoken to her two or three times prior to putting her up for VP.
That's Alaska for you in a nutshell. I can't wait to see what comes out next. And, yes, this does all matter to the MCain presidency, because he's asking us to trust his judgment on a whole range of issues, yet couldn't even get this most basic decision right.
crowbert, I totally agree with your sentiments, but is she really saying she wants rights for her family that she would deny others? Did she ever say she wanted her daughter to have an abortion, or that she wanted the opportunity to have one herself?
I'm enormously conflicted about this whole thing, and like tuna have been feeling stunned since Friday. The feeling of shock is related to being scared: I am truly scared for our country if McCain/Palin are elected. I'm scared for how it reflects upon the intelligence of the bulk of the nation (not well; and I hate being reminded how many Americans truly are morons), and I'm scared for the future.
On the family thing: it totally is private, just as I've always argued marital/sexual relations are, and has nothing to do with ability to govern or lead.
But...but...but.......
Women have been fighting for 50+ years to show that we can have careers and have families and excel at both. I honesty feel that I am doing so, that my mom did so, my sister, etc - I could name thousands of women who are doing just that.
But when I hear that Palin has a 4-month-old special needs child (who was delivered after a series of stunningly poor decisions related to the delivery), AND a 17-year-old who is about to enter an exceptionally stressful chapter in her life, I can't help but question the wisdom of pushing her career so far as to become vice president! I try to not to be too judgmental of another woman's choices. But I can definitely point to decisions other women make and know that I would not make the same ones.
And that is where the whole "character" question comes in. It angers me that I feel this conflicted about it, because it *does* feel very personal, and that is another place my feeling of being stunned is coming from. I don't believe we should judge leaders based on their personal lives, but sometimes poor judgement in private can indicate a tendency to poor judgement on the job, as well.
All that said: she is anti-choice to the point of completely violating human rights, and for that reason alone she could be Best Mom of the Century and I still would never vote for her or anyone who supports her.
And I am so appalled by McCain's selection of her I could scream.
I agree with almost everything you say, LB. One thing, though: why is it wrong for us to be critical or judgmental of other people's choices, particularly when those people are running for Vice President?
I think there's a strong distinction between judging people who are put in difficult circumstances and have to make difficult decisions (for instance, the Jean Valjean kind of decision to steal a loaf of bread so you don't starve) and people who, through patently stupid life choices, fall into difficulty (i.e. Sarah Palin's inflexible pro-life position, or someone who chooses to get addicted to heroin, etc. etc.)
These latter, I believe we have a right to judge. Of course, with the goal of rehabilitation. But without judgment, how else will they fix their difficult circumstances?
I've heard from at least a few folks that people THEY knew who were on the fence before this pushed them in the direction of Obama. I know it's all hearsay but the point being, aside from my frighteningly-obtuse right-wing crazy relatives, no one thinks that her selection as nominee for VP is a good idea.
Also Obama has seen a bump since last week.....with 40 million viewers of his speech, I'd hope so...
There are very few (if any?) precedents for VP nominees dropping out of the race or being replaced...there's only one that I can think of, it happened in the 60's or 70's, I can't even remember the guy's name, does anyone else know what I'm talking about? Something about mental illness, I think. Point being, it would throw the party into complete turmoil if it did happen....
I know, farwest, that circumstances dictate a different response, and that's a very good point. And is as it should be. If people were saying that Palin is no longer fit to be governor because her daughter got pregnant I'd be saying that's an unfair characterization of women's abilities to be working moms. But! Governor of Alaska is a vastly less important job than president of the US, especially under an elderly President whose health is not great.
Also, I read over the weekend that when she was elected governor it was running against an incumbent who had approval ratings in the single digits. So people basically wanted anyone but the incumbent; by comparison, Palin looked great.
...but you know, it actually isn't complicated. Sarah Palin is vastly underqualified to be in national politics, let alone VP. She has scandals aplenty in her professional past, her personal life doesn't even need to be brought into the open to convince people that she's a bad choice. I can stop talking about it now, I hope.
McCain's selection of her was either evidence of his incredibly poor judgement OR is actually part of some bait-and-switch Harriet Meiers-type sham, which I would not put past his party to try to pull off.
, and the Repubs probably didn't want this overshadowing their attention on the Gulf Coast, but I think this political storm might outlast the hurricanes.....
I don't really care that her teen daughter is pregnant, or that it may technically be statutory rape.
to me, it's nothing more than a reminder of all those medical studies that say abstinence only sex ed doesn't really work, and by extension, a reminder that Palin is an advocate for flawed policy on one particular issue.
what bothers me is that the McCain camp announced it right as the hurricane was making landfall. Using a natural disaster to bury your potentially politically damaging news? I'm more turned off to the McCain ticket because of that than because of the news itself.
Here's what Charles Mahtesian just wrote on Politico:
"Fishing permit violations. A blue-collar husband who racked up a DUI citation as a 22-year-old. An unmarried teenage daughter who is pregnant and a nasty child custody battle involving a family member.
All of this, to one degree or another, has surfaced in recent days as a result of efforts to discredit or undermine Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. But these revelations may have the opposite effect: In one sense, they could reinforce how remarkably unremarkable she is.
So far — and it is hard to tell what the future may hold for Palin’s unexpected national candidacy — the travails of the Palin family probably seem awfully familiar to many average Americans. It is this averageness that makes her such a politically promising running mate for John McCain — and such a dangerous opponent for Democrats. Many voters will find it easy to identify with her family’s struggles — a significant advantage in an election where the voting calculus is so unusually and intensely personal. "
Are we trying to elect our weird aunt and her kids for Vice President? Or are we trying to elect someone who is smarter and more capable than us to lead us out of our messes?
If it's the former, are we out of our fucking minds?!? I swear, this is the problem with America. It holds intelligence and ability against people. We only elected George Bush president because we thought Al Gore was "smarter'n us." Yes, he was. He was smarter. And George Bush was dumber than most of us.
But apparently Americans want just average anymore for president. Hell, I want the chew-spittin' guy who changed my oil to be president. Cuz at least he doesn't think he's above me.
Greg Sargent at Talking Points Memo has a great roundup of what we've learned about Palin today alone.
* The news that Palin once backed the Bridge to Nowhere went national.
* It emerged that Palin has links to the bizarro Alaska Independence Party, which harbors the goal of seceding from the union that McCain and Palin seek to lead.
* The news broke that as governor, Palin relied on an earmark system she now opposes. Taken along with the Bridge to Nowhere stuff, this threatens to undercut her reformist image, something that was key to her selection as McCain's Veep candidate.
* The news broke that Palin's 17-year-old daughter became pregnant out of wedlock at a time when the conservative base had finally started rallying behind McCain's candidacy.
* Barely moments after McCain advisers put out word that McCain had known of Bristol Palin's pregnancy, theAnchorage Daily News revealed that Palin's own spokesperson hadn't known about it only two days ago.
* A senior McCain adviser at the Republican convention was forced into the rather embarrassing position of arguing that McCain had known about the pregnancy "last week" -- without saying what day last week he knew about it.
* It came out that Republican lawyers are up in Alaska vetting Palin -- now, more than 72 hours after it was announced that she'd been picked.
* Palin lawyered up in relation to the trooper-gate probe in Alaska -- a move that ensures far more serious attention to the story from the major news orgs.
Not a good start to Day One of the Republican Convention. If it wasn't for Gustav, Palin's problems would be an even bigger story. Can she survive as McCain's vice presidential hopeful? SeeEagleton, Thomas. She may energize the Republican base (so much for McCain's supposed independence from the wingnuts in his party) but flop with everybody else.
Apparently the people in her hometown of Wasilla, Alaska, population 8,471, even thought of recalling her as mayor after she fired the city police chief and library director (!) for not endorsing her mayoral campaign.
In the six months McCain had to make a vice presidential pick, couldn't he of sent a few more lawyers to Alaska? They seem to be vetting their candidate ex post facto. McCain wanted to select Joe Lieberman but was told such a move would destroy the Republican Party. So he went in the other direction, picking a completely unknown hardcore conservative with virtually no relevant political qualifications. And we wonder why controversy ensued.
Honestly at this point, i don't know that the Democrats have to do anything at all except sit back and grab some popcorn. I'm thinking that the pundits and those in the media are so befuddled by this that they might actually start doing their job. Even Joe Scarborough is disgusted ... that says something.
Enough said about the family issues and dirt on Palin... Honestly, IMHO that has a life of its own. Strategically and politically speaking, the best thing for both parties, democrat and republican both is to stay clear of making that an issue on the campaign trail. Question her ability to lead, question her readiness, etc. but, as a Demcrat, and as a campaign that gets its strength and its legitimacy from focusing on the issues that matter, the whole thing about Palin's family issues should be off limits. Whether or not its irrelevant, it's not the game the Dems should getsucked into... Let the bloggers or media or tabloids deal with that, but IMHO, I wouldn't even discuss it or make it the focus of attacks. It's simply a distraction, and attacking that way I think is a political mistake. The Dems will win if they focus on the issues. They gain no points for playing the low road, but I think they have plenty of room to play the high road, treat their adversary with respect, and defeat them on the issues, which will give them the win.
I'd rather the Obama camp not win than win through shitslinging. Because honestly, what gives Obamas message credibility and what makes it give people hope and a sense of optimism is that we can have a politics that strives to be better than the shit politics of the past two elections, stick to the message, be strong in your virtues rather than tear the opponent down, and if elected, we'll actually have a President and leadership we can respect. That is the reason I support him, and I think why he has garnered the support he has across the country and among independents.
Give in to the pundits and politics of fear and division, and it only proves that this campaign is no different, that it is as ugly as every other... I would rather the Obama campaign lose than see the ideals manured... The reason being: this is about people, adn about the issues and progress in this country, it's not about Obama or the candidates... The big thing about this campaign, what makes it exceptional is the large number of people who its got involved and believing in something better, in American ideals, in promise and hard work and progress. It would be more of a disappointment IMHO to break that, than to lose the election...
This is not being elitist, this is about the American people... The worst thing about the last 8 years of policy by our government isn't just the mistakes and idiocy of actions, it's that the events have broken people's hopes in America (both Americans, and people abroad)... This thing needs to be restored. Aside from policy change, we need a change in vision, a change in politics itself. People want this change, it's not just hype...
That being said, I think the Dems *will* win, they'll win by being strong on the issues, strong in their campaign and in their message and attacks that re issue based, not personal.
It's not strong to go for low blows or kick your opponent when they're down, in fact, it doesn't win you any support... It's exactly what Fox News would love to see... I was watching Fox News earlier with Hannity and crew (which I do from time to time for a laugh), and they were mocking Obama's refusal to make Palin's family a political issue, saying something to the effect of "and maybe we'll go hold hands and sing Kumbaya or something"... These people thrive on cynicism, and the ugliest element in people, it's political tabloidism, it makes them crazy that anybody, any politician, could have the balls to refuse to roll in the shit with them... They are begging, no fomaing and frothing at their mouths for a chance to accuse the Obama campaign of dirty tactics, while everytime any negative ad or cheap bullshit tactic comes from the Republican camp, they broadcast it like it's honest to goodness news... Fuck em...
You can just see what happened the moment Wesley Clark made a remark related to McCain's military credentials, they completely took what he said out of context, picked out the one sentence that he made that questioned how "getting shot down" relates to the kind of high level strategic military leadership decision making, nevermind that Wes Clark commended his heroism, etc. and praised McCain for his service, and they loop the thing in soundbites to try to demonize him... This is the game that the right wing media is begging you to play, don't walk into their booby traps, their slime pits... Let them roll around in the manure by themselves...
The story matters, history matters, win or lose. You can lose an election and still live to fight another day, but abandon your principles, and there's no point.
Sorry for that, but I totally relate to some of the arguments about these personal issues and how they are relevant, and I do think the Palin choice is a blunder, and I get ticked off at some of the tactics and politics of the thing (including the hypocracy of the abstinence thing), but I just think, politically and strategically, it's not a place the Obama campaign wants to go...
crowbert, lb, dubk and brink have summed it up pretty well for me. i think if you take away the pronoun's "her" and "she" and focus on "the candidate's" positions there is enough there to crucify her. afterall of what has been said, i am dumbfounded how anyone can think that this pregnancy and what happens is a private matter, when millions of women in the US believe it is also a private matter between them and their doctor, regarding what happens to their body...
I love how both are adamantly opposed to teen pregnancy prevention. Boggles my mind how people can think it is a good thing that teens get pregnant, let alone how pathetic it is to think kids will just abstain from sex because it is "immoral".
This country will go down in flames if these two get in.
I've said it before, but I worry about the ability of an undecided (or a swing voter) to make a rational decision. After a year and a half of campaigning, after countless articles and books, you STILL can't make up your mind?! As we've seen in past elections, swing voters veer wildly from one position to another based primarily on gut instinct.
These indecisive folks are the ones who decide the fate of our country. If Palin and MCain are elected, it will be the fault of these undecideds.
Yeah, it is scary. I wasn't terrified of some of the other VP options, but this one is bad. Can you imagine her trying to decide whether to invade a country, launch a missile, etc., on a moments notice.
I can see her looking at a globe, seeing the area in question is somewhere near the middle east or Russia and just shouting "kill 'em all".
A female Republican operative just said on NPR's On Point:
"If Sarah Palin were a Democrat, she would have ABORTED that baby. THAT's the difference between Republicans and Democrats." Emphasis not added. The Reb. proxies are getting ugly.
come on beta ... that's grossly unfair. her daughter's pregnancy has nothing whatsoever to do with Sarah's fitness to be VP.
I'm not saying I'm a Palin supporter -- truth be told, I think she's a horrible choice. but, venomous statements like that add NOTHING to the debate and only go to show that you haven't much of a clue about the difficulties associated with raising children in today's world.
there's tons of parents out there who DO understand and for whom this isn't necessarily the "strike three" you make it out to be.
The media and bloggers etc. who are feeding this thing, are walking into the Republican trap, dragging the election with them... You know, I wouldn't put it past the Republican election machine to have planned this whole thing: an orchestrated baited VP pick... turn this into a debate about abortion, because if this remains a debate about critical issues of economy, energy policy, environment, and foreign policy, McCain will lose...
The thing about it is, Obama may not have a choice, he might be forced to address this. If anything, he may need to address the life/choice issue dead on, the way he addressed race with the Reverend Wright issue... Maybe he should come out and talk about it, it's going to be a campaign issue anyway, so unless you stand strong and make your case, people assume that you lose on that issue... I think Obama's argument for "common ground" would work... He should make a speach on the common ground there: "that we can both agree that preventing underage pregnancies through education in both abstinence and prevention is a good thing, regardless of our views on abortion."
Don't flinch or run away from it when it comes swinging. That's the reason John Kerry lost. He was a flincher. I thought Obama did a good job of engaging the Reverend Wright attacks with his speach on race: "a more perfect union"
Some people here at Archinect make me laugh. Until Clinton was beaten, most political threads here were mostly VICIOUS rants against her, attacks on just about everything she's done or was doing, attacks on her voice, her clothes, her laugh; called her the b, c, and w word almost at will, and dragged out almost everything that had nothing to do with how good a politician she may or may not be. God, I could just imagine if Chelsea had gotten pregnant at 17 under her watch, what would have been said about that here.
Now, this non-entity, this totally talentless woman, is in this thread, by some, given every break and point of civility it is humanly possible to be given on her "personal life" : how eminently gracious we now are. But I want you to think on this: as it stands now, as I am typing this, we live in a world were there is much more chance that Sarah Palin (SARAH PALIN???) will be president long before Hillary Clinton will ever be. Talk about sickening.....
Until now, most politicians (no matter how pro-life they claimed to be) would have swept the whole mess under the rug by having their kid quietly abort the pregnancy before word ever got out and by paying/blackmailing anyone who knew about it to keep their mouth shut. I always figured this was a major reason the repugs were never that serious about overturning Roe - they needed it as a means of preventing their own embarrassment. Now that it's apparently not going to be embarrassing anymore to have a pregnant underage child, it seems like another nail in the coffin for Roe.
Sarah Palin???
Tell me it isn't So Sam: http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/aug/31/sarah-palin-supported-ketchikan-bridge-nowhere-dur/
I think that the whole pregnancy thing should not be discussed at all, not part of what I am interested, but...
1-Who else thinks that the McCain people planted the 'she is covering up for her daughter' rumor
or
2-Is in fact covering up and the 5 months-pregnant is a red herring?
Finally whats up with her kid's names?
I hate this enquirer type thoughts, but with this woman I am afraid we will see more of this... But I will stop it, it is silly and I wouldnt like it done to my side.
Some more substantive arguments:
Not this woman
On the question of executive experience
A lot of people throw out Dukakis, Harriet Miers, and Clarence Thomas, but to describe Palin, I think we need to look at her Monica Goodlin tendencies.
I do have a strong feeling I disagree with you on this one wonderk....
If parents are so on the dark about their kids and what they are up to then we have a problem. Actually we have a big problem and that is parents are taking the easy out just like our beauty queen. We don't need her family setting examples for kids having kids. She is not what this country needs in anyway shape or form. It is wrong to brush this issue off as oh well!
but ma, it was ok for the "Presidents Daughter"
Oh I did not mean to insinuate that that's the kind of example we want to set....or that teenage pregnancy is OK....in fact, the first thing that came to mind for me was "great, Britney Spears' mom is the Repub VP nominee". However, as a female who was once (still?) terrified of pregnancy, those are probably the kindest words that you can hope for from your mother in such a situation. My mother is crazy and not supportive at all, so I appreciate her response to the whole thing.
I think ultimately this will turn off a subset of the far-right-wing evangelicals who preach for abstinence and who think she's a bad parent. So be it. I appreciate Obama's response to the issue:
"I've heard some of the news. I've said before I think families are off limits, children limits. It has no relevance," Obama said. "I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories. My mom had me when she was 18. And how families deal with issues of children shouldn't be part of our politics."
i'd agree with obama's response too. regardless of what any of us think, this can not and should not be fodder for stumping.
sadly - obama knows (or at least i know) that this is ultimately an opportunity for the GOP, like any other hurdle, to provide another wedge issue, to win by casting light on the snobbery of the democrats.
i'm worried that this situation, and the liberal elite recoiling in horror at the thought, will actually turn more "family values" voters into palin fans than not.
in their inimitably twisted fashion, the far-right/evangelical voters will conjoin supporting sarah palin with "true" feminism, and will convince themselves that the dems grouching is all just a bunch of intolerance.
they will again claim to be the "tolerant" party who's truly the more "socially accepting" one, as long as you're not gay, black, jewish (except the israelis, we like them...lieberman too) oriental, arab, indian or god forbid...mexican.
be very, very careful, people. don't spring the trap.
or mccain/palin will do down in a cesspool of flood waters from their vantage at baton rouge, leaving the RNC in tatters...
but wait!
it will open the door for a dark-horse republican to take control, prove his mettle by winnowing out the yays and stealing the nomination.
ron paul?
mikey bloomberg?
who will it be?
Damn,,,,I 'm starting to thing the Ralph Nader-Joe Liberman ticket might have a run at the white house.
Yet nobody in the (supposedly liberal) media has pointed out that VP-screechy not only CHOSE not to have an abortion, but also allowed her daughter to choose whether or not to have an abortion even after she said she disagreed with the Alaska Supreme court when they stuck down the parental notification law. I would like a pundit to ask her why she thinks that she and her family are allowed choices she would forbid others to exercise, and if there are any others rights or choices out there she also would to reserve only for herself and her kin.
She chose not to have an abortion, based on her faith and her family - great. That's her choice. Not mine, not the government's either. That's part of having a representational government - even if they haven't been all that representational of the majority of the people for the last 30 years, and the last 8 you've needed at least a million dollars just to wake them up from their drunken slumber.
But basically, I think the fallout is that prior to Obama's choice every damn pundit out there was saying that "the choice for vice-president is emblematic of how they will lead in the white house" and Palin shows that McCain's instincts as a "maverick" are lousy to dangerous.
Criticize Obama for being too inexperienced, and then pick a VP with LESS experience.
Rail against "[Republican] business as usual" only to find out that she was as cozy as a mayor of 5000 could be with Stevens and the bridge to nowhere.
To all you non-fundamentalist republicans out there, really? Really? I mean I am sure there are Democrats out there who if put on the ticket I would hold my nose to vote for them, but if they then ran a campaign like McCain has ran his, I'd leave the presidential mark off my ballot in the fall.
I'm wondering where Mr. Happy is? Someone must be vetting him....
Ever since the announcement of Sarah Palin I've been kinda walking around stunned. I'm not angry per say at the blantant strategic choice of McCain's pick: I'm just slightly annoyed and completely curious if he REALLY thinks that women are that naive as to vote for him b/c he chose a woman for VP, even though she/he do not share the same ideological values. If so I pity the man.
And now that it's been devulged that Palin's daughter is actgually 5 months pregant I am truly do believe that McCain is slightly off his rocker and thoroughly believe his campaign people never completely vetted her in the first place. I think it's excellent that Palin and her husband are supporting their daughter in her decision to keep the baby. I also agree with snook that this setting another bad example to teenager that getting pregnant at such a yound age is in fact OK.
I really admire Obama and his statement. Family issues concerning the children need to be left out of the race.
i threw this question out on another thread but seeing how this one has more traction....
does anyone think 'levi' might be 18 or older? i'm really curious because, if so, he would have committed a felony under alaskan law.
if he did, surely gov. palin and her husband knew that fact, right? and, if so, why - as an officer of the law - did she not report him to the alaskan authorities? surely her constitutional duties would require her to do so, right? if she didn't, why does she think her own family situation is above the law? they incarcerated a young man here in atlanta for far less.
wouldn't it speak volumes about gov. palin's integrity and ethics if indeed she decided not to report the young man? sure, i get in a 'real world' sense why she'd want to spare her daughter and the young man any further, but what's the difference between this and trying to protect a member of the administration from a crime, simply because they're on the 'right' side?
mark it down - she may lose the nomination over this...
Yeah, good call. That's not relevant, lets focus on the real issues here, like energy policy, foreign policy, and the economy... I really don't think it's in anybody's interest to get distracted from the issues...
Dude its cool - havent you seen Juno?
While I agree that the question of the activities of the daughter (and really, her own personal life) are not to be dwelled upon as an electoral issue (on the web where people bloviate, chatter away.) but my issue is that she wants rights for herself and her family which she would, given the opportunity, restrict others from having. And that is a legitimate question.
And that's not Obama's place to question her, but a journalist's place. I think they might be extinct, but here's hoping one shows up between now and the election.
juneau?
My feeling is, for Obama, the family's off limits. But for the press, please, go to town!
This is all about McCain's judgment and ability to lead the country. If he couldn't even choose a running mate without vetting her first, and chose (by all accounts) in a hurry, without research, then what kind of impulsive, trigger-finger president would he be?
I hope all the most sordid and unfortunate stuff regarding Palin gets blasted all over the media. I think it's worth recounting again and again.
To wit:
• Governor for less than two years.
•Governor of a state whose population is roughly equal to the entire city of Portland, OR.
•Prior to that, Mayor of a town of 7,000.
• Almost recalled as mayor of a town of 7,000, because she fired two people who hadn't voted for her.
• As Governor, caused her ex-brother in law to be fired because he was no longer her brother in law. And also fired his employer, when his employer refused to fire the ex-brother in law.
• Pro-life even in cases of rape or incest. Might, might, support abortion if the life of the mother is threatened. Wouldn't support abortion even if her own daughter had been raped.
•Daughter is 17 and pregnant. Not married to the father, and was 16 when impregnated. Parents support her choice to have baby.
•Palin's latest child is half-rumored to actually be her daughter's (I know the point above makes this one suspect.)
•Had last baby at age 44, despite the fact that any neonatologist would say this is an extremely bad idea, as pregnacies over 35 are considered high risk, and pregnancies over 40 extremely high risk (1 in 300 babies have Downs Syndrome. Many more have other complications.)
• Believes that creationism should be taught in schools.
• Seems not to believe in evolution.
• Was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, which advocates Alaska's secession from the rest of the United States. (How this alone wouldn't disqualify her from being VP is beyond me. She wanted to not be a part of the US? Does she hate America?)
•Husband once arrested for drunk driving.
• Big supporter of uber-corrupt Ted Stevens, despite her running on an "anti-corruption" platform.
• Actually supported the bridge to nowhere, until she was pressured to vote against it. (Her seeming to be against it was one of the main reasons McCain liked her.)
• McCain had spoken to her two or three times prior to putting her up for VP.
That's Alaska for you in a nutshell. I can't wait to see what comes out next. And, yes, this does all matter to the MCain presidency, because he's asking us to trust his judgment on a whole range of issues, yet couldn't even get this most basic decision right.
crowbert, I totally agree with your sentiments, but is she really saying she wants rights for her family that she would deny others? Did she ever say she wanted her daughter to have an abortion, or that she wanted the opportunity to have one herself?
I'm enormously conflicted about this whole thing, and like tuna have been feeling stunned since Friday. The feeling of shock is related to being scared: I am truly scared for our country if McCain/Palin are elected. I'm scared for how it reflects upon the intelligence of the bulk of the nation (not well; and I hate being reminded how many Americans truly are morons), and I'm scared for the future.
On the family thing: it totally is private, just as I've always argued marital/sexual relations are, and has nothing to do with ability to govern or lead.
But...but...but.......
Women have been fighting for 50+ years to show that we can have careers and have families and excel at both. I honesty feel that I am doing so, that my mom did so, my sister, etc - I could name thousands of women who are doing just that.
But when I hear that Palin has a 4-month-old special needs child (who was delivered after a series of stunningly poor decisions related to the delivery), AND a 17-year-old who is about to enter an exceptionally stressful chapter in her life, I can't help but question the wisdom of pushing her career so far as to become vice president! I try to not to be too judgmental of another woman's choices. But I can definitely point to decisions other women make and know that I would not make the same ones.
And that is where the whole "character" question comes in. It angers me that I feel this conflicted about it, because it *does* feel very personal, and that is another place my feeling of being stunned is coming from. I don't believe we should judge leaders based on their personal lives, but sometimes poor judgement in private can indicate a tendency to poor judgement on the job, as well.
All that said: she is anti-choice to the point of completely violating human rights, and for that reason alone she could be Best Mom of the Century and I still would never vote for her or anyone who supports her.
And I am so appalled by McCain's selection of her I could scream.
I agree with almost everything you say, LB. One thing, though: why is it wrong for us to be critical or judgmental of other people's choices, particularly when those people are running for Vice President?
I think there's a strong distinction between judging people who are put in difficult circumstances and have to make difficult decisions (for instance, the Jean Valjean kind of decision to steal a loaf of bread so you don't starve) and people who, through patently stupid life choices, fall into difficulty (i.e. Sarah Palin's inflexible pro-life position, or someone who chooses to get addicted to heroin, etc. etc.)
These latter, I believe we have a right to judge. Of course, with the goal of rehabilitation. But without judgment, how else will they fix their difficult circumstances?
I've heard from at least a few folks that people THEY knew who were on the fence before this pushed them in the direction of Obama. I know it's all hearsay but the point being, aside from my frighteningly-obtuse right-wing crazy relatives, no one thinks that her selection as nominee for VP is a good idea.
Also Obama has seen a bump since last week.....with 40 million viewers of his speech, I'd hope so...
There are very few (if any?) precedents for VP nominees dropping out of the race or being replaced...there's only one that I can think of, it happened in the 60's or 70's, I can't even remember the guy's name, does anyone else know what I'm talking about? Something about mental illness, I think. Point being, it would throw the party into complete turmoil if it did happen....
it was thomas eagleton in 1972.
it got out he had electric shock therapy and had checked into a mental hospital in the past.
I know, farwest, that circumstances dictate a different response, and that's a very good point. And is as it should be. If people were saying that Palin is no longer fit to be governor because her daughter got pregnant I'd be saying that's an unfair characterization of women's abilities to be working moms. But! Governor of Alaska is a vastly less important job than president of the US, especially under an elderly President whose health is not great.
Also, I read over the weekend that when she was elected governor it was running against an incumbent who had approval ratings in the single digits. So people basically wanted anyone but the incumbent; by comparison, Palin looked great.
This is so freakin' complicated.
...but you know, it actually isn't complicated. Sarah Palin is vastly underqualified to be in national politics, let alone VP. She has scandals aplenty in her professional past, her personal life doesn't even need to be brought into the open to convince people that she's a bad choice. I can stop talking about it now, I hope.
McCain's selection of her was either evidence of his incredibly poor judgement OR is actually part of some bait-and-switch Harriet Meiers-type sham, which I would not put past his party to try to pull off.
palin defeated frank murkowski.
was an AK senator for several terms.
murkowski tried to get ANWR opened to drilling.
he ran for govenor in '02 and then turned over his senate seat to his daughter.
AK politics is so effing corrupt and backwards. there should be some rule that offspring can't hold office.
This is getting messy
, and the Repubs probably didn't want this overshadowing their attention on the Gulf Coast, but I think this political storm might outlast the hurricanes.....
+ other lies and corruption...
oh geez, she even lied about that?
what's next, she wasn't actually injured when she scored the "winning" buckets as sarah barracuda?
ouch...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYYiw_y2qDI
I don't really care that her teen daughter is pregnant, or that it may technically be statutory rape.
to me, it's nothing more than a reminder of all those medical studies that say abstinence only sex ed doesn't really work, and by extension, a reminder that Palin is an advocate for flawed policy on one particular issue.
what bothers me is that the McCain camp announced it right as the hurricane was making landfall. Using a natural disaster to bury your potentially politically damaging news? I'm more turned off to the McCain ticket because of that than because of the news itself.
it's a common political technique, dump bad news on a friday so that it runs out before monday's printing
yes...but that's a little different that taking advantage of potential devastation and loss of life.
please, the current [mis]administration has always used tragedies as political fodder
Here's what Charles Mahtesian just wrote on Politico:
"Fishing permit violations. A blue-collar husband who racked up a DUI citation as a 22-year-old. An unmarried teenage daughter who is pregnant and a nasty child custody battle involving a family member.
All of this, to one degree or another, has surfaced in recent days as a result of efforts to discredit or undermine Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. But these revelations may have the opposite effect: In one sense, they could reinforce how remarkably unremarkable she is.
So far — and it is hard to tell what the future may hold for Palin’s unexpected national candidacy — the travails of the Palin family probably seem awfully familiar to many average Americans. It is this averageness that makes her such a politically promising running mate for John McCain — and such a dangerous opponent for Democrats. Many voters will find it easy to identify with her family’s struggles — a significant advantage in an election where the voting calculus is so unusually and intensely personal. "
Are we trying to elect our weird aunt and her kids for Vice President? Or are we trying to elect someone who is smarter and more capable than us to lead us out of our messes?
If it's the former, are we out of our fucking minds?!? I swear, this is the problem with America. It holds intelligence and ability against people. We only elected George Bush president because we thought Al Gore was "smarter'n us." Yes, he was. He was smarter. And George Bush was dumber than most of us.
But apparently Americans want just average anymore for president. Hell, I want the chew-spittin' guy who changed my oil to be president. Cuz at least he doesn't think he's above me.
Greg Sargent at Talking Points Memo has a great roundup of what we've learned about Palin today alone.
* The news that Palin once backed the Bridge to Nowhere went national.
* It emerged that Palin has links to the bizarro Alaska Independence Party, which harbors the goal of seceding from the union that McCain and Palin seek to lead.
* The news broke that as governor, Palin relied on an earmark system she now opposes. Taken along with the Bridge to Nowhere stuff, this threatens to undercut her reformist image, something that was key to her selection as McCain's Veep candidate.
* The news broke that Palin's 17-year-old daughter became pregnant out of wedlock at a time when the conservative base had finally started rallying behind McCain's candidacy.
* Barely moments after McCain advisers put out word that McCain had known of Bristol Palin's pregnancy, theAnchorage Daily News revealed that Palin's own spokesperson hadn't known about it only two days ago.
* A senior McCain adviser at the Republican convention was forced into the rather embarrassing position of arguing that McCain had known about the pregnancy "last week" -- without saying what day last week he knew about it.
* It came out that Republican lawyers are up in Alaska vetting Palin -- now, more than 72 hours after it was announced that she'd been picked.
* Palin lawyered up in relation to the trooper-gate probe in Alaska -- a move that ensures far more serious attention to the story from the major news orgs.
Not a good start to Day One of the Republican Convention. If it wasn't for Gustav, Palin's problems would be an even bigger story. Can she survive as McCain's vice presidential hopeful? SeeEagleton, Thomas. She may energize the Republican base (so much for McCain's supposed independence from the wingnuts in his party) but flop with everybody else.
Apparently the people in her hometown of Wasilla, Alaska, population 8,471, even thought of recalling her as mayor after she fired the city police chief and library director (!) for not endorsing her mayoral campaign.
In the six months McCain had to make a vice presidential pick, couldn't he of sent a few more lawyers to Alaska? They seem to be vetting their candidate ex post facto. McCain wanted to select Joe Lieberman but was told such a move would destroy the Republican Party. So he went in the other direction, picking a completely unknown hardcore conservative with virtually no relevant political qualifications. And we wonder why controversy ensued.
After watching that video I never thought I'd have so much respect for Campbell Brown.
Honestly at this point, i don't know that the Democrats have to do anything at all except sit back and grab some popcorn. I'm thinking that the pundits and those in the media are so befuddled by this that they might actually start doing their job. Even Joe Scarborough is disgusted ... that says something.
Enough said about the family issues and dirt on Palin... Honestly, IMHO that has a life of its own. Strategically and politically speaking, the best thing for both parties, democrat and republican both is to stay clear of making that an issue on the campaign trail. Question her ability to lead, question her readiness, etc. but, as a Demcrat, and as a campaign that gets its strength and its legitimacy from focusing on the issues that matter, the whole thing about Palin's family issues should be off limits. Whether or not its irrelevant, it's not the game the Dems should getsucked into... Let the bloggers or media or tabloids deal with that, but IMHO, I wouldn't even discuss it or make it the focus of attacks. It's simply a distraction, and attacking that way I think is a political mistake. The Dems will win if they focus on the issues. They gain no points for playing the low road, but I think they have plenty of room to play the high road, treat their adversary with respect, and defeat them on the issues, which will give them the win.
I'd rather the Obama camp not win than win through shitslinging. Because honestly, what gives Obamas message credibility and what makes it give people hope and a sense of optimism is that we can have a politics that strives to be better than the shit politics of the past two elections, stick to the message, be strong in your virtues rather than tear the opponent down, and if elected, we'll actually have a President and leadership we can respect. That is the reason I support him, and I think why he has garnered the support he has across the country and among independents.
Give in to the pundits and politics of fear and division, and it only proves that this campaign is no different, that it is as ugly as every other... I would rather the Obama campaign lose than see the ideals manured... The reason being: this is about people, adn about the issues and progress in this country, it's not about Obama or the candidates... The big thing about this campaign, what makes it exceptional is the large number of people who its got involved and believing in something better, in American ideals, in promise and hard work and progress. It would be more of a disappointment IMHO to break that, than to lose the election...
This is not being elitist, this is about the American people... The worst thing about the last 8 years of policy by our government isn't just the mistakes and idiocy of actions, it's that the events have broken people's hopes in America (both Americans, and people abroad)... This thing needs to be restored. Aside from policy change, we need a change in vision, a change in politics itself. People want this change, it's not just hype...
That being said, I think the Dems *will* win, they'll win by being strong on the issues, strong in their campaign and in their message and attacks that re issue based, not personal.
It's not strong to go for low blows or kick your opponent when they're down, in fact, it doesn't win you any support... It's exactly what Fox News would love to see... I was watching Fox News earlier with Hannity and crew (which I do from time to time for a laugh), and they were mocking Obama's refusal to make Palin's family a political issue, saying something to the effect of "and maybe we'll go hold hands and sing Kumbaya or something"... These people thrive on cynicism, and the ugliest element in people, it's political tabloidism, it makes them crazy that anybody, any politician, could have the balls to refuse to roll in the shit with them... They are begging, no fomaing and frothing at their mouths for a chance to accuse the Obama campaign of dirty tactics, while everytime any negative ad or cheap bullshit tactic comes from the Republican camp, they broadcast it like it's honest to goodness news... Fuck em...
You can just see what happened the moment Wesley Clark made a remark related to McCain's military credentials, they completely took what he said out of context, picked out the one sentence that he made that questioned how "getting shot down" relates to the kind of high level strategic military leadership decision making, nevermind that Wes Clark commended his heroism, etc. and praised McCain for his service, and they loop the thing in soundbites to try to demonize him... This is the game that the right wing media is begging you to play, don't walk into their booby traps, their slime pits... Let them roll around in the manure by themselves...
The story matters, history matters, win or lose. You can lose an election and still live to fight another day, but abandon your principles, and there's no point.
Wow, that was a long winded rant...
Sorry for that, but I totally relate to some of the arguments about these personal issues and how they are relevant, and I do think the Palin choice is a blunder, and I get ticked off at some of the tactics and politics of the thing (including the hypocracy of the abstinence thing), but I just think, politically and strategically, it's not a place the Obama campaign wants to go...
crowbert, lb, dubk and brink have summed it up pretty well for me. i think if you take away the pronoun's "her" and "she" and focus on "the candidate's" positions there is enough there to crucify her. afterall of what has been said, i am dumbfounded how anyone can think that this pregnancy and what happens is a private matter, when millions of women in the US believe it is also a private matter between them and their doctor, regarding what happens to their body...
a 44 year old grandmother? should be livin in a house trailer, not next to the white house...
eggs actly
I love how both are adamantly opposed to teen pregnancy prevention. Boggles my mind how people can think it is a good thing that teens get pregnant, let alone how pathetic it is to think kids will just abstain from sex because it is "immoral".
This country will go down in flames if these two get in.
I've said it before, but I worry about the ability of an undecided (or a swing voter) to make a rational decision. After a year and a half of campaigning, after countless articles and books, you STILL can't make up your mind?! As we've seen in past elections, swing voters veer wildly from one position to another based primarily on gut instinct.
These indecisive folks are the ones who decide the fate of our country. If Palin and MCain are elected, it will be the fault of these undecideds.
Yeah, it is scary. I wasn't terrified of some of the other VP options, but this one is bad. Can you imagine her trying to decide whether to invade a country, launch a missile, etc., on a moments notice.
I can see her looking at a globe, seeing the area in question is somewhere near the middle east or Russia and just shouting "kill 'em all".
Flames, I tell ya.
yeah, Palin failed the first test, the 3AM phone call, "uh, Mom, Levi wants me to put out, and he doesn't have a condom, what should I do?"
A female Republican operative just said on NPR's On Point:
"If Sarah Palin were a Democrat, she would have ABORTED that baby. THAT's the difference between Republicans and Democrats." Emphasis not added. The Reb. proxies are getting ugly.
come on beta ... that's grossly unfair. her daughter's pregnancy has nothing whatsoever to do with Sarah's fitness to be VP.
I'm not saying I'm a Palin supporter -- truth be told, I think she's a horrible choice. but, venomous statements like that add NOTHING to the debate and only go to show that you haven't much of a clue about the difficulties associated with raising children in today's world.
there's tons of parents out there who DO understand and for whom this isn't necessarily the "strike three" you make it out to be.
The media and bloggers etc. who are feeding this thing, are walking into the Republican trap, dragging the election with them... You know, I wouldn't put it past the Republican election machine to have planned this whole thing: an orchestrated baited VP pick... turn this into a debate about abortion, because if this remains a debate about critical issues of economy, energy policy, environment, and foreign policy, McCain will lose...
The thing about it is, Obama may not have a choice, he might be forced to address this. If anything, he may need to address the life/choice issue dead on, the way he addressed race with the Reverend Wright issue... Maybe he should come out and talk about it, it's going to be a campaign issue anyway, so unless you stand strong and make your case, people assume that you lose on that issue... I think Obama's argument for "common ground" would work... He should make a speach on the common ground there: "that we can both agree that preventing underage pregnancies through education in both abstinence and prevention is a good thing, regardless of our views on abortion."
Don't flinch or run away from it when it comes swinging. That's the reason John Kerry lost. He was a flincher. I thought Obama did a good job of engaging the Reverend Wright attacks with his speach on race: "a more perfect union"
Some people here at Archinect make me laugh. Until Clinton was beaten, most political threads here were mostly VICIOUS rants against her, attacks on just about everything she's done or was doing, attacks on her voice, her clothes, her laugh; called her the b, c, and w word almost at will, and dragged out almost everything that had nothing to do with how good a politician she may or may not be. God, I could just imagine if Chelsea had gotten pregnant at 17 under her watch, what would have been said about that here.
Now, this non-entity, this totally talentless woman, is in this thread, by some, given every break and point of civility it is humanly possible to be given on her "personal life" : how eminently gracious we now are. But I want you to think on this: as it stands now, as I am typing this, we live in a world were there is much more chance that Sarah Palin (SARAH PALIN???) will be president long before Hillary Clinton will ever be. Talk about sickening.....
I can buy that argument, bRink...
Until now, most politicians (no matter how pro-life they claimed to be) would have swept the whole mess under the rug by having their kid quietly abort the pregnancy before word ever got out and by paying/blackmailing anyone who knew about it to keep their mouth shut. I always figured this was a major reason the repugs were never that serious about overturning Roe - they needed it as a means of preventing their own embarrassment. Now that it's apparently not going to be embarrassing anymore to have a pregnant underage child, it seems like another nail in the coffin for Roe.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.