Sarah Palin's daughter IS pregnant, actually

[Brittain33]

I know I am not representative of anyone, but this is a total non story to me. Yawn.

I totally agree. I don't care, and I wish her the best in the future.

We also can all agree that no Democrat can criticize anyone in the Palin family for this without justifiably looking bad. I think people are missing that Democrats don't need to raise the issue for it to become one.

I am going to state a view I don't personally hold, so before responding, consider that. The simple fact is, a lot of people with conservative social values believe that women who have full-time careers and families do a disservice to the latter because they can't be in both places at once. They're right, there are trade-offs.

Even without Michael Moore, Keith Olbermann, or any other Democratic attack figure bringing it up, I find it hard to believe that there aren't going to be some conservative voters who will connect Palin's active political career with her daughter's transgression. They may empathize with her, they may agree with her politics, but they may see an issue in a mother of five pursuing a full-time career when her daughter appears to have need of more supervision and strictness.

I repeat: I don't share this view. I don't think parents can have total control over their children's lives and I don't think abstinence-only education is the way to go. The problem is, both the Palins and a very large chunk of the Republican party do feel that way, and Bristol Palin's personal experiences are a sign of failure.

It is manifestly unfair to a young girl to have her life held up for public view like this. That is why the real sin here is in the campaign that didn't do its homework before selecting Palin.

Have at me. 

[Brittain33]

It makes no sense that Palin would drop out. McCain knew about this before he picked her and was apparently OK with it.

Has this been established? If so, McCain looks even more reckless than I thought.

I am sorry if that comes across as hackish, but this is a potential problem for Palin even if the Democrats never bring it up. Conservative voters are not so ill-informed or willfully ignorant that they will choose not to hear this story and respond to it. Some of them are strong enough believers in the Republican party to separate the family from the policy and vote McCain anyway. However, those were not the people we needed to be concerned about.

The issue for people will be whether they feel Palin can continue to be a role model of a mother and do right by her family while also serving as VP. If you think it isn't an issue, then we'll see.

[Brittain33]

I still want to know if anyone feels that this ought to be relevant in the campaign.

I took a stab at why I think it will be, even though the Democrats can not and should not make it a campaign issue. As a social conservative, I'm curious to hear your take on my read on the issue.

For the record, if I am right, I see the outcome to be a swap of someone else for Palin rather than long-term damage to the ticket, with Palin using this news as an excuse for her to spend more time with her family. For once, that excuse would be accurate.

[Brittain33]

Brittain, I just don't think a 17 year old getting knocked up is that big a deal. Granted if Palin opposes sex education, that was a failing. Maybe the daughter's birth control failed. Who knows.

My question is, seriously, who cares what you think? Who cares what I think? That's not where the action is on this issue.

I really do NOT think it shows bad judgment on Sarah Palin's part. I do not know what goes on in their family, but I do not pass judgment on her raising of her children, only to be glad that as a gay man I didn't grow up in a household like that. The problem is with the large number of people who do feel like behavior like this is the fault of the mother and the permissive culture, and who will be "depressed," as Sam says, to see an exemplar of a good mother and a good culture producing the same outcome.

[Brittain33]

I mean, come on, Palin is supposed to be the most socially conservative VP in the nation's history, yet raises her children to be irresponsible and promiscous. I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if that family consideres women as objects. This is what happens when you believe that morality is the government's responsibility.

Aargh. Please don't do this, it derails the thread into outrage and means we don't discuss the issue as it really plays out.

[Brittain33]

Meeker (I believe) mentioned earlier in this thread that McCain knew about this before the choice.  Does anyone have any confirmation of this?

It's in the original article I posted.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN2944356420080901?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

I wonder if they would have admitted it if they hadn't known, though. Palin appears to have felt that the vetting process was so skimpy, and her chances so unlikely, that I wouldn't have faulted her for not thinking she had to bring it up before she found herself on a plane to Dayton.

This reflects poorly on McCain whether he knew or not. Maybe I'm wrong, but at the very least, did they think they would keep it a secret through Election Day and it wouldn't be a distraction? Wouldn't they have acknowledged it somehow?

[Brittain33]

The Anchorage Daily News reports that as of two days ago, Sarah Palin's press spokesman, Bill McAllister, didn't know Bristol was pregnant.

I'm inclined to believe more than ever McCain didn't know, that the Palin family was trying to keep this a secret (not an unrealistic proposition), and that deeper vetting would have brought it out because the Palins aren't pathological liars or idiots.

Link with the relevant bits to be found at the bottom.

http://www.adn.com/1536/story/512560.html

[Brittain33]

The Anchorage Daily News reports that as of two days ago, Sarah Palin's press spokesman, Bill McAllister, didn't know Bristol was pregnant.

I'm inclined to believe more than ever McCain didn't know, that the Palin family was trying to keep this a secret (not an unrealistic proposition), and that deeper vetting would have brought it out because the Palins aren't pathological liars or idiots.

huh?  the press spokesman would NOT know because the news was not yet public.  There is NO REASON WHATSOEVER to inform a press spokesman of such deeply personal information until you're ready to go public.

I think this information ceased to be "deeply personal" the minute that Palin was offered the nomination and press awareness of her went up 100-fold. Fairly or not.

[Brittain33]

I think this information ceased to be "deeply personal" the minute that Palin was offered the nomination and press awareness of her went up 100-fold. Fairly or not.

You're right.  But you can stop salivating.

Any salivating I am doing is over the evidence of McCain's recklessness and poor decision-making, not what is happening to that girl.

I am not going to dig up your comments and others from the Edwards threads, where there were also real live people involved in news that had a political dimension as well. I truly feel bad for Bristol. For Sarah Palin? As a mother, yes, as a candidate, I don't hate her but don't wish her well. For McCain, yes, there's schadenfreude that he's done damage to the "experience and wisdom" claim on two very different fronts.

We're here to discuss how issues play out. Some of these issues are going to play disproportionately well or poorly for our candidates. There are tensions between how we discuss those things, and how we hang together as a community that cherishes our differences and still talks across the divide. I think we'll survive.

[Brittain33]

Edwards the candidate cheated on his terminally ill wife.  Palin the candidate cheated… how?  Not even sure how one is relevant to the other.

As I said before, I take pleasure in what this says about McCain's judgment.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, what I recall is people taking pleasure in Edwards' embarrassment and in mocking his supporters because they trusted his judgment, without saying much of anything about how publicizing the situation hurt his kids. People took lots of pleasure in the whole situation without acknowledging that downside. Of course, no one here was literally publicizing the Edwards scandal, making it news, except for the bumping... but I'm not publishing the news that McCain bypassed vetting his candidate in any press outlets, either, just posting here. It's in the news through no doing of mine, and not just in the Enquirer, so we're discussing it here.

You must be reading the pregnancy itself as "good news" for me. It's not. I've spelled this out already, though.

[Brittain33]

So much for those conservative values, huh?

I thought you weren't supposed to have a baby until you were married?

Yes, when a child runs off and gets pregnant it is always the parents fault.

This deserves better than a glib answer. Do you not deny that conservatives have blamed a LOT of today's ills, including teenage pregnancy, low graduation rates, juvenile crime, etc. on bad parenting?

[Brittain33]

Here is a question. Would some here be posting what they are posting now, if Sarah Palin had been a male?  Is it poor judgment to pick a male as your VP nominee with a knocked up daughter?

I thought about this in terms of who would qualify as a male Sarah Palin: someone who is a strong social conservative, intended to have some crossover with working class people, lots of children, good looks and youth, and a prominent appeal to female social conservatives based on "walking the walk" in his own life. You may have arrived at the same person I did, and that is Rick Santorum.

He would indeed have invited the same, if not more, scrutiny for this.

It is hard for me to think of another male politician who would be a male Sarah Palin, because such a veep would not have made the splash Palin did or been invested with such hopes as a game changer who could potentially draw in new voters while also holding down the base.

Palin has both profited and borne greater responsibility for running as a supermom in addition to as a conservative politician. "Supermom" was surely part of her appeal to McCain and to the enthusiastic conservatives who have rediscovered McCain this weekend and sent money and love.

[Brittain33]

Well, let's think of it this way - how did Mike Huckabee, the once prominent voice of many social conservatives in this country, react when we found out that Britney Spears' sister was pregnant? Sure, the Spears' have a reputation for being "conservative" Republicans but at the time the family was an easy target for ridicule in society. What did Huckabee say? He came out against bashing the young girl, expressed joy in her desire to keep and raise the child and wished her all the best.

That's nonsensical because the Spears family aren't the political opponents of the Republicans, leaders in a party the Republicans claim is on the wrong side of the culture war destroying America.

[Brittain33]

It strikes me as a bit unfair to hold up politicians of more "traditional" values to a higher standard as to the behavior of their children.

Is it any more unfair than when they hold up gays or African-Americans to a higher standard, and they bring it up in the first place?

If they're the ones who insist on the standards and that they should be higher than the Democrats believe in, yes, they must walk the walk. Perhaps one needs to have been casually referred to as one of society's delinquents by politicians and religious figures on a regular basis to appreciate this. My first sympathies for double standards do not extend to conservative politicians, not since I've had to tune out hearing people quite seriously and sincerely say that I got married in order to destroy the institution of marriage. The onus is on them to stand up to their words.

(on edit: what I had specifically in mind is the accepted views among most Republicans and nearly all Republican elected officials that two same-sex parents are an inferior option to two opposite-sex parents. If Palin hasn't said that at least once, it would have been extraordinary; Bush and McCain say it all the time.)

[Brittain33]

It is tough to pass your values onto your issue seamlessly, Brittain. Folks have hangups on the gay thing, no doubt about it. And it is pretty hard wired.

I agree, and understand. However, it can not be denied a very large number of people feel it is a duty and a positive contribution to judge people by their children's behavior, because society bears the burden of dealing with children brought up poorly. I would welcome a mature discussion of these issues and the way they are used as gotcha!s in politics. I don't believe it's going to come from this, and I do feel that one side is responsibility for the focus on gotcha!s to disqualify candidates for office who otherwise have innovating and interesting ideas.

The abstinence-only issue is also salient, I think.

What this seems to come down to is that no one feels that the next President of the United States should be decided on an issue like that, a sentiment with which I agree, and yet these are the stupid issues that do decide elections. It's manifestly unfair.

[Brittain33]

So many of these people are absolute scum. I have no problem calling them like I see them. They are absolute hypocrites.

Who's been behaving like filth over this, other than the trolls?

[Brittain33]

So many of these people are absolute scum. I have no problem calling them like I see them. They are absolute hypocrites.

Who's been behaving like filth over this, other than the trolls?

We must have a lot of trolls then.

Point out the posts you find filthy that weren't also called out as trolls by the Dems, then.

If you're going to call people filth, do it by name.

[Brittain33]

I'm not combing through this seventeen page thread to find every insult and every bit of amusement at this news. You and several others have responded in a responsible, mature manner. I can't say that for many others.

Ok... thank you for your response. Based on comments about "most Obama supporters," and some comments made elsewhere, I felt that some people were casting too wide a net in criticizing how this has been discussed.