Jackson Free Press

The drama is coming fast and furious from the abstinence-only McCain-Palin campaign today. The Washington Post is reporting:

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin announced moments ago that her 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, is five months pregnant and is planning to keep the baby and marry the father. "We have been blessed with five wonderful children who we love with all our heart and mean everything to us," said Sarah and Todd Palin in a statement. "Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support."

The news comes just 72 hours after Palin was introduced by John McCain as his vice presidential nominee. In the time between the pick and Palin's statement today, rumors had grown louder and louder that Palin's youngest son, Trig, was actually her grandson and that it was Bristol who had given birth to the young boy.

According to Reuters, McCain campaign officials knew about Bristol's pregnancy during the vetting process and that the rumors surrounding baby Trig's birth made an announcement necessary.

James Dobson's response.

I'm sure we would find nothing anywhere from Dobson or other radical-righters blasting teenage mothers, right?

Previous Commentsshow

Here's the story in the Anchorage Daily News, which was trying to confirm the story Saturday. Lots of comments underneath.

DonnaLadd

Sep 1 2008

A compelling post about this teen pregnancy at Salon: Monday, Sept. 1, 2008 13:54 EDT Abstinence-only educators Both Sarah Palin and John McCain back abstinence-only education. No surprises there. What's galling is this: When the subject is a pregnancy to an unwed, minority teenage mother growing up in some (presumably Democratic) urban area, that pregnancy becomes fodder for lectures from conservatives about bad parenting, the perils of welfare spending and so on. But when the subject is a pregnancy to an unwed, white teenager from some small town in a Republican state, that pregnancy is...a celebration of the wonders of God's magnificence--and choosing life! ? Thomas Schaller

DonnaLadd

Sep 1 2008

Those rumors that went around over the last few days about Palin perhaps being the mother of young trig, and not the grandmother, apparently started on right-wing radio in Alaska in recent months. She definitely seems to have massive family drama, real or unproved.

DonnaLadd

Sep 1 2008

Obama tells media to "back off" on the Bristol pregnancy story, as reported by The Washington Post: Sen. Barack Obama told reporters to "back off" Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her family, following the GOP vice presidential candidate's disclosure that her unmarried 17-year-old daughter is pregnant. "I have said before and I will repeat again, I think people's families are off limits," Obama declared after attending a Labor Day picnic here. "People's children are especially off limits. This shouldn't be part of our politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin's performance as a governor or her potential performance as a vice president. So I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories."[...] The Democratic nominee grew heated when a reporter asked him about an unattributed quote from a John McCain aide that linked his campaign to Palin pregnancy rumors that have swirled on gossip and liberal blogs in recent days. The McCain campaign offered no evidence for the charge, and to the contrary, as the chatter percolated over the weekend, most Obama aides seemed reluctant to even acknowledge it, much less fan the flames. The Illinois senator has been on the receiving end of numerous baseless allegations and whisper campaigns, including that he is a Muslim and is hostile to Israel. "I am offended by that statement," Obama shot back, in response to the McCain aide's charge. "There is no evidence at all that any of this involved us. I'm hope I'm as clear as I can be. In case I'm not, let me repeat: We don't go after people's families. We don't get them involved in politics. It's not appropriate and it's not relevant. Our people were not involved in any way in this and they will not be. If I ever thought that it was somebody in my campaign who's involved in something like that, they'd be fired."

DonnaLadd

Sep 1 2008

This isn't about the kid, it is about what mommie said: We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents Notice that the decision was to have the baby, not to keep the baby. Doesn't that make our conservative VP pro-choice?

Rico

Sep 1 2008

There's a comment under that post that nails it: I voted for Reagan,Bush, Im a vet and former LE I do not want to be part of the Jerry Springer Party or be seen as wanting to turn the White House into a double wide- ENOUGH run away from this fiasco-- She must withdraw citing family concerns!!!! I'm with this guy; I've talked incessantly about how Bill Clinton turned his White House tenure into one big trailer-park drama and sent our country spiraling as a result. I grew up amid that kind of constant drama, and the last place I want to see it is at the top of our presidential ticket. The country can't afford at this juncture to have keep taking time out to deal with Palin family drama. And, mark my words, they are and will continue to be surrounded by it. It doesn't seem like she's working very hard to escape it. I said it on another thread: In the drama department, Palin reminds me of our own Frank Melton: one drama after another. And it makes women look so bad. McCain should have vetted.

DonnaLadd

Sep 1 2008

I noticed that, too, Rico. She's proud that she chose. She had the choice, and she made the one right for her and her family. But Palin doesn't want other women to have that same choice—even victims of rape and incest. I also read that her radical-right church doesn't believe in any form of birth control other than the rhythm method, but don't quote that as fact. I don't know for sure if it's true.

DonnaLadd

Sep 1 2008

Here's a compelling post on Slate—by a woman, of course: This whole weekend has felt like a marathon of Lifetime television. All anyone wants to talk about all of a sudden is the intimate family choices of stressed-out working mothers. Every woman I know is consumed by Sarah Palin's larger-than-life life: Was it irresponsible for her to continue on as governor, having given birth to a special needs baby? Was it reckless of her to accept a vice presidential tap on top of that? Should she really have been flying in the eighth month of her high-risk pregnancy? Is she doing the right thing by supporting her unmarried teenage daughter whose pregnancy she revealed a few hours ago? Should she have inserted herself into her sister's messy marriage? Feminist or otherwise, everyone has an opinion on Sarah Palin's life and family and choices. We've all been here before, in our own lives. It's almost a palpable relief to be able to talk about all this stuff at cocktail parties. This is the Pandora's box John McCain opened up when he picked Palin as his running mate—a woman whose family life is vastly more interesting than her very brief political career. Is it sexist that everyone is judging Palin on the former rather than the latter? Yes. But I suspect that all this frenzied close-reading of Sarah Palin's uterine life was unavoidable. What are the "mommy wars" if not broad female judgments about other women's private decisions? The truth is, whether or not John McCain wanted to have that big, brutal public conversation about the reality of abstinence and teen pregnancy and contraception and teenage mothers without the means to support their children, Sarah Palin is pushing it all onto the front pages. I don't think the GOP intended to have this conversation at all, and definitely not on these terms.

DonnaLadd

Sep 1 2008

I don't know Guys....but the bottom line is, it's not about there being a god in heaven as Michael Moore and that other dude in "coach" was sayin....it'a about Karma.... and the dog has finally caught it's tail....this is pure Yukon gold.........

atlntaexile

Sep 1 2008

As far Michael Moore, and Rush Limbaugh, and that former DNC chairman, and that Focus on the Family spokesman, and the RNC staffer who wanted to link to the Rush thing about Obama-and-Trig, and every other talking-mouth trying to hawk trash in both directions, it just shows that *all* they care about is politics. Trash is trash, regardless of what party is attached to it. Here is my question that dawned on me after the news about Bristol Palin sunk in, and after I saw all the Google listings with her photo since Friday holding her infant brother. Why in hell did McCain and Palin put her in that position, if they both knew of her pregnancy by last Friday??? If Palin is too naive about the glare of the international media onslaught to know that those photos of her daughter with the baby will be shown around the world, then the McCain staff should have known and made sure to either keep Bristol in the background, or at least not have her appear holding the infant. That's not about politics; it's about protecting the young woman from as much pain as possible even if the mother was ready to deal with the media herself, as she ran for vice president and cares for a baby with Downs Syndrome and a pregnant teen daughter. Even if she thinks she can handle it all at once—and maybe she can—she should have made sure those photos didn't happen. I feel very sorry for Bristol. She has been thrust into an international spotlight just as she's going through one of the hardest things she ever will. Now she gets to do it in public. It won't help to tell people they shouldn't talk about it; her mother has put pregnancy issues front and center throughout her political career, so there is no way to put that genie back into the bottle she pulled it from, so to speak. The big question here is the judgement of her, McCain and his media handlers of putting that young woman out there front and center to be eaten alive during such a time. Palin is young enough to have put her daughter first this time or at least not to have marched her in front of the cameras carrying an infant. It's as if Palin wants every ounce of attention she can get; well, she's getting it. I fear she (and her husband) are too naive to understand where this can leave them, and their kids.

DonnaLadd

Sep 1 2008

I'm been reading all weekend about the rumor that Palin could be Trig's grandmother, but I didn't dare share that here since unsubstantiated rumors don't fly on this site, and for good reason. Even if Palin is really Trig's mother, I don't think that she should have given a speech in Texas and got on a plane back to Alaska if she was in labor a month early and knew in advance that the baby had special needs. She should have found a hospital in Texas. I see a double standard when it comes to teenage pregnancy in this country. It seems like it's only okay for well-to-do members of the majority to make that mistake and be forgiven for it. If one of Obama's daughters was a teenager and got pregnant, what would folks like James Dobson say then?

LatashaWillis

Sep 1 2008

Right, L.W. I'd read it, too, but clearly it was an unvetted rumor. You're right: the plane thing is disturbing; supposedly her water had already broken. Now, she went ahead and put her teen daughter in front of cameras holding a baby, knowing she was pregnant; she just should have known that those photos would become tabloid fodder. The hypocrisy is there, as you mention, but I'm really bothered by the poor judgement when it comes to exposure of the teen daughter.

DonnaLadd

Sep 1 2008

*yawn* Who cares? If someone wouldn't vote for John McCain because his vice presidential pick's daughter had a kid out of wedlock, then they really need to examine what is important in an election. That's like not voting for Bill Clinton because his brother was a screw up.

QB

Sep 1 2008

I read the Dobson response and it looks like many of his "followers" are in an uproar about his passive response...call him a hypocrite for applauding the Palin family's stance..where in times past he's bashed the families of pregnant teens

Meka

Sep 1 2008

"I see a double standard when it comes to teenage pregnancy in this country"....."Let he who is without Sin"......The calculated and insideous wording in Dobson's moralistic responce has served evangelicals with many a "stone" in situations like this.

atlntaexile

Sep 1 2008

Harry, you seem to be missing the point, and drawing a false analogy. Conservatives would have wigged out had Clinton (either one) had an unmarried teenage pregnant daughter. It's the hypocrisy, stupid! (To crib an old Clinton phrase, not call you stupid.) And it flies in the face of everything they've said about single mothers all these years -- blasting them incessantly for being the root of the world's problems. As member18 said, they have cast many stones on this very issue. The judgement issue is huge right now, considering that McCain did not seem to vet Palin. at. all. Is he going to make all his Cabinet decisions this way? Secretary of defense? State? Oh, and adding to a really bad day for the McCain campaign, Van Halen is blasting the campaigning for using their song, "Right Now," during Palin's introduction. Finally, new polls show that voters are not lured to McCain-Palin, and are supporting Obama in larger numbers. And that's before today.

DonnaLadd

Sep 1 2008

*yawn* Who cares? If someone wouldn't vote for John McCain because his vice presidential pick's daughter had a kid out of wedlock, then they really need to examine what is important in an election. That's like not voting for Bill Clinton because his brother was a screw up. Well, the same could be said for Obama. How often was he blamed for things that OTHER PEOPLE did? Yes, when the news about Palin's daughter came out, Obama spoke in her defense. Sounds like this "Muslim" is aware of the Golden Rule.

LatashaWillis

Sep 1 2008

Guess abstinence education didn't work out too well for the Palin family. I'm glad that Bristol chose not to kill her baby to spare herself or her mom the embarassment. While I think its low class to expose the privacy or criticize the family of political figures, it's becoming clearer every day that Gov. Palin = BAGGAGE. Which calls into question McCain's judgment to run with someone who clearly wasn't properly vetted and whose political resume is just as thin if not thinner than Obama's.

Jeff Lucas

Sep 1 2008

You best believe that had this been Chelsea Clinton, we wouldn't hear the end of it from the right wing. I also feel sorry for Bristol Palin for being thrusted in the spotlight over this. However, her pregnancy does expose a moral dilemma for the Republican party (including her mother) and their stance on morality. BTW, is Trig's real name Trig? I think of trigonometry whenever I hear his name.

golden eagle

Sep 1 2008

I've ceased being amazed by hypocritical Republicans in the conservative movement who run on "family values" but are themselves usually hiding the very same flaws and failures they would condemn their political opponents for.

Jeff Lucas

Sep 1 2008

BTW, is Trig's real name Trig? I think of trigonometry whenever I hear his name. Yes, it is. Her youngest son is named Trig Paxson Van Palin. After Trig was born, a spokesperson for Palin said that Trig is Norse for true and brave victory. His middle name, Paxson, is the name of an area of Alaska that Palin and her husband think is "one of the most beautiful spots in Alaska," according to a report on MSNBC. Palin is on record joking that she was naming Trig "Van Palin" after eighties rockers Van Halen.

LatashaWillis

Sep 1 2008

Then, it's *really* ironic, L.W., that Van Halen talk them to cease and desist on playing their music at campaign events, after they used a Van Halen song Friday to announce Palin. One does wonder what Paxson will look like when Palin's precious developers get done with it. Or, maybe she thinks development is beautiful.

DonnaLadd

Sep 1 2008

As an aside, has anyone else noticed that Palin looks like Tina Fey? Maybe Fey should make some SNL appearances.

LatashaWillis

Sep 1 2008

She does look like Tina Fey! I guess she can play her on the Lifetime movie. ;-) Seriously, I wish she weren't such a radical-righter and was someone who could make us proud as a female leader. It's so sad to see a dynamic woman try to ride to the top by going on the offensive against the environment, polar bears and a little thing called women's rights. It's really laughable that McCain thought she was going to pick up all those Clinton supporters. He said it, so I assume he was being honest.

DonnaLadd

Sep 1 2008

So, Palin is a member of the virulently anti-abortion (even rape and incest) group, Feminists for Life. They call the pill, the IUD and Plan B "abortifacients." And here is their position on contraception from their stie: Leaving abortion aside for just a moment, even most forms of contraception invade the woman's body, not the man's--and in more cases than we want to admit, scar and irrevocably damage those bodies. (Even condoms, the one "male" form of contraception, usually end up being the woman's responsibility--survey after survey shows that it is invariably women, not men, who are responsible for purchasing condoms.) From http://www.columbiaspectator.com/ ... What Serrin Foster (head of Feminists for Life) will not be advertising during her campus visit is that Feminists for Life is opposed to contraception. On this point, her organization and the rest of the pro-life movement is unified: most pro-life groups in the United States are anti-contraception. Today, pro-life groups are reclassifying the most common contraception methods, including the birth control pill, the patch, the intrauterine device, and Depo Provera, as "abortifacients," claiming, with no scientific backing, that they cause abortions. On its Web site, Feminists for Life lists emergency contraception as an abortion method. If this were true, Feminists for Life must also consider 40 percent of all birth control methods as abortion methods too because they have the same mode of action as emergency contraception.

DonnaLadd

Sep 1 2008

This really shocks me! I think that the best way to avoid unintnded pregnancies (and, therefore, abortions) is to make sex education and birth control readily available. These "feminists" want to take all access and options away, how does that make life better for women? IT really seems to me they want to live in a fantasy world of their own creation, not looking at reality not looking at history. I find it frightening.

Izzy

Sep 2 2008

I agree with you, Laurel. But the way for too many Republicans (including McCain and Palin, it seems) has been to blame teenage mothers (and their families), even as they oppose efforts to lower teen pregnancy. Associated Press today: Republican John McCain, whose running mate disclosed that her unmarried 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, has opposed proposals to spend federal money on teen-pregnancy prevention programs and voted to require poor teen mothers to stay in school or lose their benefits. [...] McCain's record on issues surrounding teen pregnancy and contraceptives during his more than two decades in the Senate indicates that he and Palin have similar views. Until Monday, when the subject surfaced in a deeply personal manner, teen pregnancy and sex education were not issues in the national political campaign. Palin herself said she opposes funding sexual-education programs in Alaska. "The explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support," she wrote in a 2006 questionnaire distributed among gubernatorial candidates. McCain's position on contraceptives and teen pregnancy issues has been difficult to judge on the campaign trail, as he appears uncomfortable discussing such topics. Reporters asked the presumptive GOP presidential nominee in November 2007 whether he supported grants for sex education in the United States, whether such programs should include directions for using contraceptives and whether he supports President Bush's policy of promoting abstinence. "Ahhh, I think I support the president's policy," McCain said. When reporters pressed McCain whether the government should provide contraceptives or counseling on contraceptives, he replied, "You've stumped me." McCain said later that he was sure he opposed government spending on contraceptives. Meantime, the father of Bristol's baby said on his myspace page that he "doesn't want children." I feel so sorry for those two young people that I can't stand it; their personal drama will be played out on an international stage. And didn't the McCain campaign say last week that Palin flew her children to Ohio for the announcement, but not telling them she was doing the veep thing? That it was a "surprise" vacation or such? In other words, did she not have a serious conversation with Bristol or the other kids about what was about to hit their family, considering Bristol's pregnancy? Truly, maybe this wasn't the family's moment to be in a hot spotlight ... at least not Bristol's.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

Hannity, Beck, Liberman (don't be fooled by him), Buchannon, Rust, Coulter and the rest of the republicans come to steal, kill and destroy. They desire to make the abnormal, stupid or unintelligent and righteous - normal, intelligent and evil. And to make the ethical unethical - the devil's kind of chores. I agree with Barack's comment regarding the Palin girl's pregnancy. Glad to see Palin's closet being cleaned. A good republican is an expired republican, in my view.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

I agree that a politicians family should be left alone, but I also think politicians should be called out for being total hypocrites! You are a hypocrite when: - you are preaching abstinence as sex education, but your own teen-aged daughter gets knocked up and is not married. (Palin) - you are against gay marriage, gays in the military, etc, and you get caught having gay sex with a prostitute or playing footsie in an airport bathroom. (Mark Foley, Bob Allen, Larry Craig, many others) - you go on and on and on about the "sanctity" of marriage, but have been divorced twice and are cheating on your current spouse. (most of Congress) They should be called out on these things!

Tre

Sep 2 2008

I agree with you too Tre. Barack had to take the position he took, I think, to keep from being demonized or attacked needlessly.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

Walt, you don't think he said it because he believes and meant it?

Jeff Lucas

Sep 2 2008

Yes, Jeff, I think he meant it, but I also think he knew to say anything different, even nuanced or finessed on the matter would cause him some trouble and likely be seen as cunning and insensitive by the dark side. By saying what he said, he didn't give them any canon fodder to work with and he showed great sensitivity to the plight of the child.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

Of course, Jeff, we know it doesn't matter what Barack does, the repugnants will spin everything in some negative manner or totally ignore the wonderful things he does and says.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

I agree, Walt. I've been amazed while sparring online with a few conservatives this past weekend their capacity to compartmentalize Palin's negatives and McCain's judgment from their attacks on Obama, all while claiming to be energized by her selection.

Jeff Lucas

Sep 2 2008

They are energized because they think or hope this white woman and white man can save America from the ______. You add the word!

Walt

Sep 2 2008

The reason why Obama called off the dogs on Palin is because he does not want the abortion issue anywhere around him. Do you actually think, walt, that most of America agrees with his views on abortion? I'm a democrat turned republican in 2000, thank god, because the party just went too far left for my taste. All it takes is just research on the man to see that he is the left of the left, and he thinks people like me are stupid. So, walt, you're saying people like me "come to steal, kill, and destroy? You left wingers need to just keep on talking cause your digging your own hole about ethics and plain decency. And by the way, where is the womens rights movement on all of this? Shouldn't a woman, any woman, regardless of party lines be commended for this accomplishment? The reason is they're only for women that line up with their political views. What freakin' hipocrits. Oh by the way, did you see the coverage on the protesters at the republican convention? You see which side is the right side by seeing which side all the loons are on.

southmedic

Sep 2 2008

Southmedic, thanks for chiming in. I can't imagine you ever being anything but a republican and Zell Miller styled, to boot. Stop using our good name. You picked a good name - you're definitely ole style and southpathetic. I personally have a radical conscious, not a mere liberal one. This is why I can see the likes of you for what you and your kind are so clearly. Obama did what Jeff and I said he did. We wouldn't listen to you. You're against abortion but also against welfare, social security, medicare and medicaid, but you're not against unwanted and unnecessary wars and you're without charity. The republican party has stolen, robbed and killed like few others in modern time, yet you quite ignorantly ask me why I make said claims against your party. You mention research. How can you research when you can't read. If you could read, you would see the writing on the wall for you and your party. Carry on though. What would the world be without your kind trying to destroy it?

Walt

Sep 2 2008

I disagree with you. Obama hasn't shied away from his views on the right to choose abortion. Polls do show that most Americans support the right to choose an abortion. And most Americans do not support Palin's radical view of no abortion even in case of rape or incest. Bristol Palin is about to marry a 17-year-old who says on his myspace page that he doesn't want kids. This is not encouraging for the child they are about to bring into the world. Perhaps if they had been taught about birth control, we wouldn't be at this juncture today. But Palin, apparently, thinks contraception is bad, too. And all, please remember that should anything happen to McCain, Palin could choose up to three Supreme Court justices. (Maybe they would allow Alaska to secede finally.) Besides, this is most certainly not an abortion issue, regardless of how the GOP talking points tries to spin it. It's a teen pregnancy/contraception issue, and the very current issue of McCain's kneejerk decision-making. And it's an issue of how/why they put the daughter (and now her teen boyfriend) front and center, including with her holding a baby on Friday. (That, by the way, is the main reason I do not believe the McCain campaign knew; surely to God they were not so stupid (or uncaring toward Bristol) to allow her to be in front of the world's cameras holding an infant, knowing those photos would be talbloidized within days. I criticize her mother for that, too, but it's possible the Palins are simply too provincial to understand the implications of media on this level. But McCain's people aren't). did you see the coverage on the protesters at the republican convention? You see which side is the right side by seeing which side all the loons are on. I've covered the "loons" who protest conventions and inaugurations in the past (at the DNC convention in NYC when Clinton was chosen the first time, it was the most interesting part), and you're right that many of them are loons (and many are professional protesters who hate both parties and want attention; not all, of course). But many of the delegates inside the Convention are just are loony in their own way. What struck me yesterday watching the RNC on C-SPAN is how scary and out-of-touch (and old and white) that crowd is. Those are McCain's peeps, though. Southmedic, it's an insult to women to say that women should hold Palin to a different standard because she's a woman. That's a bigotry of low expectations, and Palin doesn't deserve to be held to a different gender-based standard. I would say nothing different if she were a man, or a Democrat.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

And it's clear that it's not an "accomplishment." McCain rashly chose Palin because, as he said last week, he hopes she draws Clinton supporters. It was a political decision, with no "country first" attached to it. It's also a move that is likely to hurt her and her family immensely, and probably already is. Neither McCain, or it seems the Palins, thought it through. It is a very different situation to elect a woman with kids who understand women and family concerns, and to elect one who doesn't hesitate to put her daughter out for the world to ogle in her toughest moment. I think of Colin Powell's wife, who apparently said no to his running for president for what it would do to the family. It could never be easy, but she has children in very tough situations right this second and is ensuring that their personal sagas play out in public. I would criticize a man for doing the same thing—much as I believed that Bill Clinton was the biggest asshole on the planet for the Lewinsky affair, in no small part because he did it with his teenage daughter in the same building. Finally, the McCain campaign has hoisted double-wide drama on the American public at a time when we need to be focused on the big public and big ideas to repair the mess that was Bush/Cheney. It stands in start contrast to Obama's rule in his campaign of "no drama." Trailer-park-esque drama tends to be amusing for a few days, but people will tire of it quickly, especially if more idiocy keeps coming out of the Alaska archives.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

Also old south, I won't watch the Farce on Minnesota - the republican convention. I'm fleeing that which is no good.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

Funny how different liberal folks and conservative folks see things. Southmedic thinks the dems went too far to the left. That is TOTALLY not how I see it. I think the repubs have gone too far to the right while dems try to run to the center and now the scale is WAY off. Bush and company have slid the slider on the political spectrum so far to the right that republicans of old look like dems by todays satndard (Ike) and current moderate dems are called left wingnuts.

Tre

Sep 2 2008

By the way, Walt and southmedic: Keep it civil. The next comment I deem as a personal attack will be deleted without further comment.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

Is anyone even at that convention? Or even watching it for that matter? It's more like "Fernwood Tonight" than a national political convention. And actually I would rather a "left of left" be in charge than a "right of right". You cannot reason with those religiuos nut cases. Look at Irag and the whole middle east, a fundy is a fundy is a fundy, period. A lefty at least has a brain "left" to reason with...................

atlntaexile

Sep 2 2008

I hate the left-right paradign because it no longer works for American politics—even someone like John McCain (at least the pre-campaign one). The problem with Palin is that she is about as radical right as you can get—both on the social conservative and the fringe-anti-government scale. She not only seems to want to drown the federal government in a bathtub (except when it benefits her state), but she wants to take the bathtub to claim its own sovereignty. Can one really imagine Alaska as its own country with no federal assistance? The other weird thing is how many of her family (including herself) have gotten in trouble for poaching, hunting, fishing and/or driving recreational vehicles in wildlife preserves illegally. So far, the list includes her, her husband, her future son-in-law, her father, and the brother-in-law she tried to get fired. Do they not understand those laws are there for a reason? I can understand if they are anti-federal-laws and government—I support the First Amendment—but I don't understand how someone like that ends up as vice president and very possibly president.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

My apology. I luv my foes from the other side. I bet he won't apologize as well. Republicans have no regrets. Their plans for America and the world can't withstand a look in the mirror.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

and you are correct Donna....this is about the courts. Bottom line for me. And I am a moderate conservative who usally votes repub (there I've said it! ATLexile admits it on his favorite blog!)....but I just can't do it this time. The "courts" bottom line. Taxes were going up anyway regardless of who's on first.........

atlntaexile

Sep 2 2008

It's about the courts for me as well ATLexile. And ending this stupid, pointless war in Iraq.

Jeff Lucas

Sep 2 2008

Jeff...it's worse than that. WE have overstayed our welcome and are being asked to leave the party by the host....."oh no please let us stay the night and help you clean up in the morning....really we don't mind"...."wow that oil dip was really good....can we have a little more.....???" Like they have the door open and are holding our coats! geeez

atlntaexile

Sep 2 2008

I know, baquan. That truly is a liberal pipe dream to be out in less than 18 months. Despite Obama's promises, we won't be leaving Iraq in such a short amount of time. It will probably take his entire term to drawdown troop presence to a level that can still maintain stability. And we will probably ALWAYS have a military presence there, just as we do in Japan, Germany, etc. But I believe Barack will move us in that direction, which is more than I can say about McSame.

Jeff Lucas

Sep 2 2008

Both ABC News and the Anchorage Daily News are reporting that the McCain campaign is trying to "stall" the ethics investigation of Palin in Alaska for using her office in personal matters. So we're going to spend the next two months watching the McCain camp trying to interfere with a state investigation? And it is crazy ironic: the federal government tries to interfere in a state investigation of a governor who used her office to settle a personal vendetta, Can you imagine what this could argur for a McCain presidency?

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

It just keeps coming. Time magazine has a must-read piece on Palin's background, campaign tactics, and effort to censor the public library: But in the first major race of her career — the 1996 campaign for mayor of her hometown of Wasilla — Palin was a far more conventional politician. In fact, according to some who were involved in that fight, Palin was a highly polarizing political figure who brought partisan politics and hot-button social issues like abortion and gun control into a mayoral race that had traditionally been contested like a friendly intramural contest among neighbors. In the early 1990's, Wasilla was little more than half as big as it is today, and much more loosely confederated. The main issue at the time, says longtime resident Chas St. George, was public safety. "We needed a police department," he says. "So we set up a group to make it happen." That group — Watch on Wasilla — had a handful of the town's most influential figures. That included St. George, the town's mayor John Stein, and Palin, who wasn't in elected office yet. Her father-in-law Jim Palin and his wife Faye were also in the group. Eventually, they started a police department, led by chief Irl Stambaugh. Kaylene Johnson, author of Sarah, a Palin biography published earlier this year, says that there was another place the power group in town met, a step aerobics class that Stambaugh and Stein took along with Palin. That class signed the original petition for Palin's first political race, for city council in 1992, which she won. Four years later, she took on her former workout buddy in a race that quickly became contentious. In Stein's view, Palin's main transgression was injecting big-time politics into a small-town local race. "It was always a non-partisan job," he says. "But with her, the state GOP came in and started affecting the race." While Palin often describes that race as having been a fight against the old boy's club, Stein says she made sure the campaign hinged on issues like gun owners' rights and her opposition to abortion (Stein is pro-choice). "It got to the extent that — I don't remember who it was now — but some national anti-abortion outfit sent little pink cards to voters in Wasilla endorsing her," he says. [...] Vicki Naegele was the managing editor of the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman at the time. "[Stein] figured he was just going to run your average friendly small-town race," she recalls, "but it turned into something much different than that." Naegele held the same conservative Christian beliefs as Palin, but didn't think they had any place in local politics. "I just thought, that's ridiculous, she should concentrate on roads, not abortion," says Naegele. [...] Stein says that as mayor, Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast." The librarian, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire her for not giving "full support" to the mayor. St. George, however, points out that Palin couldn't have seen everything through an evangelical lens. She had, he says, notably resisted calls to restrict operating hours for the bars in town. And even if faith did play an unusually large role in her decision-making as mayor, it may have only reflected the continued rise of evangelicism in the valley, a growth that continues to this day. [...] When Palin, who went on to win re-election by a landslide, was finally forced out of the Mayor's office by term limits in 2002, her husband Todd's stepmother Faye Palin ran for Mayor. She did not, however, get Sarah Palin's endorsement. A couple of people told me that they thought abortion was the reason for Palin not supporting her family member — Faye is, they say, pro-choice, not to mention a Democrat. A former city councilman recalls that it was a heated race, mainly because of right-to-life issues. "People were writing 'BABYKILLER' on Faye's campaign signs just a few days before the election." Palin lost the race to the candidate that Sarah backed, Dianne Keller, who is still Mayor of Wasilla. (Over the weekend, Faye Palin told the New York Daily News that she liked listening to Barack Obama speak and that she wasn't sure who she would vote for in November.) [...] In the end, her political journey from banner-waving GOP social conservative to maverick reformer may simply be about good timing. It's what former journalist Bill McAllister, who now works for Palin's press staff, used to call "Sarah-dipity" — that uncanny gift of knowing exactly what voters are looking for at a particular moment. And, of course, the political will to give them what they want.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

Our country needs a sharp, young and brillant mind to lead it after the Bush and Cheney shake down and debacle. Not an old man playing the race and sex cards as a desperate move to maintain the status quo. We owe our situation to no good republicans who chose dumb over intelligence and know-how. They still refuse to see the light that blinds them. They even thought Russia would listen to them about Georgia after what we did in Iraq. Bush was about to bomb Russia for attacking the state of Georgia in America until Condoleeza told him there are other Georgias, to which Bush said, "Damn other Georgia and drilling for wind. I thought T. Boone Pickens was crazy when he talked about drilling for wind in America. You learn something new every day."

Walt

Sep 2 2008

This epitomizes why this country is hated: Jeff wrote: --- condescending --- imperialist attitudes. The people there want us out. The Prime Minister has said they want combat troops out by 2010. If we stay when they want us out, then it is an occupation. They don't hate us for our freedoms. They hate us because much of Iraq is cosidered holy land by them and the presence of "infidel troops" on their holy land in Saudi Arabia and Iraq offends them. That is a recruitment tool for Al Quaeda.

FreeClif

Sep 2 2008

Video of lively discussion on Larry King about Palin controversy.

LatashaWillis

Sep 2 2008

Genius, Whitley! I'm bowing!

Walt

Sep 2 2008

I agree with Baquan's reasoning, too. I'm either smart or don't know jack.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

Our President and General Patraeus have stated that Iraq is a sovereign country. If you are sovereign, then YOU, in a sovereign manner, without consulting others, determine what will take place in your own country. It is imperialist any time you overide a nation's sovereignty to tell them that you know better than they do what is good for them. THEIR Prime Minister has stated we should have a timetable to leave, but those who think like you do feel we have a right to overide their wishes? We would not stand for it here, but so many of us are so arrogant as to think that we have the right to say what is best for OTHERS. What makes you think they want the freedoms we enjoy here? What makes you think they may not want to be ruled by Mullah Omar? What is our strategic objective there? When will we achieve victory? Are you willing to spend your children's inheritance in Iraq when we need to build roads, bridges and schools right here in America. I love America and I am not for squandering more blood and treasure because some people are so arrogant as to imagine that the Iraqis want to be like us!!

FreeClif

Sep 2 2008

I can't add much more to banquan's response, which is how I feel. While we have to abide by the Iraqi governments desire for us to leave, we have to be certain that we aren't leaving a broken country prematurely or we will end up undermining the success of the surge and end up coming back sooner than we think. We will probably have an agreement with them to maintain a small (less than 1000 or so) troops to continue training Iraqi forces as long as its needed and welcome, and we will probably always have a military presence nearby as a first response to help defend the country as an ally against Al-Quida and the like. That's just being real. That's the price we will pay for attacking a country without provocation.

Jeff Lucas

Sep 2 2008

Whitley convinced me. I want them out right now.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

To bring this back into the general vicinity of the topic of the thread — smile — here's a good one. Lotus nails what this is all about over on Folo, even as one of the commenters talks about how conservative "protect their womenfolk" (Icky.): olemissreb, I don't think anything to do with Palin's children is the point (though the shallow MSM — shallowest of all, cable teevy — may want to keep focus there where it's easy for them to stay lazy). Even Palin herself isn't really the point. THE POINT is McCain's choice of Palin, i.e., the lack of judgment he made plain and undeniable with that one act, like nothing quite had before.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

We need more JFPs! Leave the children alone! I agree with Jeff's last statement and with Ladd. If the media paid more attention to what really matters the public may have been informed enough to know that we never should have been in Iraq in the first place and cannot feasibly maintain a large combat presence there. The MSM will put a ton of people on an investigation that is sex related while not properly vetting "facts" used to take us to war.

FreeClif

Sep 2 2008

"what does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush was right 90% of the time." And what does it say about your judgment when you voted against a King holiday and have a history of tearing up fighter jets, living on your grandfather's and father's military reputations, and summoning the common refrain I was a p.o.w. every time you can't think of an intelligent reply to a question.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

Thanks Baquan, I've heard of them before. I wish him luck.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

BTW, there is a huge lesson for "bloggers" who fear the telephone in the rumor they picked up this weekend about Palin possibly faking being the mother of her baby. This was an old story floating in her state for months on talk radio. Her enemies there are from both parties (which would be a compliment is she weren't so extreme and, apparently, politically petty, which will draw enemies from all sides regardless; ask Frank Melton). Anyway, over at National Review, Byron York writes on NRO: As far as the fake baby story was concerned, Carey (of Anchorage Daily News) told me that the rumors were going around in Alaska a few months ago, not long after the birth of Sarah Palin's fifth child. He told me that Daily News reporters and editors explored the story quite extensively, and, as Carey said on NPR, "could find no basis for it except that people who didn't like Sarah Palin believed it." He told me that Daily News reporters talked at length to the Palins about it — Carey said the Palins were actually eager to talk about the rumor because they knew how much it had spread around Alaska. He also said Daily News reporters looked into the medical angle of the rumor, which included talking to at least one doctor involved, and again found nothing to support the story. In the end, Carey told me, the newspaper became "convinced that it was not true." What is amazing about all this is how making just one phone call to a man like Carey could have given some of the bloggers at The Atlantic and DailyKos pause before they wrote so extensively about it. Why didn't they do that? He's right. Clearly, this rumor was out there for months in Alaska, being spread by her angrier critics. But the problem is that "bloggers" (the ones who aren't actually journalists) seem terrified of the telephone and of actually confronting the people they're criticizing, or in some cases bashing, and that means they often make assumptions based on bad or incomplete information. In this case, no one needed to call Palin; they could have gotten in touch with ADN reporters to ask what was known about it. Of course, it sounds like the journalists (including that dude from the National Enquirer) who were actually confronting Palin are the ones who got her to come out with the real story. The lesson here is that you can get tips to be investigated from wherever they lie, but then you need to investigate them and actually *talk* to people about them. And that applies whether you're on the left or the right, or just holed up in front of your computer hating everybody. ;-)

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

This also teaches the lesson that the best use for most blogs are the original, non-blogger sources they are linking to.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

We should focus on America's great issues. We should not be distracted too long by Palin's daughter's pregnancy. That may have been why McBush picked Palin --- an intentional distraction: .

FreeClif

Sep 2 2008

If the media paid more attention to what really matters the public may have been informed enough to know that we never should have been in Iraq in the first place and cannot feasibly maintain a large combat presence there. The MSM will put a ton of people on an investigation that is sex related while not properly vetting "facts" used to take us to war. One last thing, I realize I might have been unnecessarily provocative in my initial posting about the withdrawal, but it's truly my gut feeling that we aren't going to be out of there as quickly as many would like for us to, and that Iraq isn't entirely united in its desire for us to leave now. I think Obama knows this, but he's being intentially coy so as not to piss off his base. If they were, why would President Talabani make this statement in a recent TV interview about the U.S. withdrawal deadline in 2011: "Iraq has the right, if necessary, to extend the presence of these troops..." That tells me that even THEY want an option to have us around if the shit hits the fan.

Jeff Lucas

Sep 2 2008

So, now Republicans are trying to tell us that criticism of Palin is "sexist." Please. Don't insult all women everywhere this way. This is running for vice president; she should stand to the same scrutiny as any of the boyz up there. Saying it is sexist is akin to saying that the McCain camp's criticism of Obama's record is racist. Criticism of Palin's record, background and her views on women's issues is by no means sexist. Neither is criticizing McCain for desperately picking a running mate without fully vetting her. Or for allowing her daughter to be put out there holding an infant just before announcing that she is pregnant. Don't start playing the sexist card, Mr. McCain. The man who told the horribly ugly joke about Chelsea Clinton and Janet Reno, and who has opposed efforts to lower teen pregnancy, just. doesn't. get. to. And it sure ain't no way to get them Clinton chick supporters you so desperately want. The McCain needs to stop playing games and get out there and answer in a press conference the very serious questions about Palin's allegiances and past decisions, not to mention his own judgement in choosing someone with an extreme-right record.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

Because the Republican establishment seems to be scurrying to do all it can to justify Palin's selection, that may well be a sign that McCain created more problems than he betted on. Looks like they're all memorizing the same script of talking points so that they can stay 'on message'. From what I'm reading here and elsewhere, I wouldn't be at all surprised if she's booted from the ticket. That may sound far-fetched now, but it's happened before (Eagleton in '72) and it's early yet! The more we find out about Palin, the more it speaks to McCain's poor judgment in putting politics over country and in her poor judgment in subjecting her daughter to a worldwide fishbowl.

Kacy

Sep 2 2008

Jeff, give us a link to that statement so that it can be put in context. Also, was that statement made after the Bush administration franctically got with the Iraqis to get them to step back from their initial hard line in the German interview? Even if it was not made under duress (figuratively, at gun point), Iraq DOES NOT have the right to extend the presence of U.S. troops. Only the President of the United States has the right to extend the presence of U.S. troops. The bottom line for real pragmatists is that we cannot afford it. We need to put more troops in Afghanistan and invest in our infrastructure in this country. Why are you so gung ho to keep other people's children committed to a losing cause?

FreeClif

Sep 2 2008

Let's declare "mission accomplished", bring most of the troops home, send some to Afghanistan where we never finished the job and focus on really important issues like Bristol Palin's baby's daddy.

FreeClif

Sep 2 2008

Check this out: What If Bristol Palin Were Black? Christian-right leaders and conservative stalwarts have praised the decision of Bristol Palin, the daughter of Governor Sarah Palin, to carry her child to term. She is 17 and conceived this child out of wedlock. Now imagine she wasn't the daughter of a prominent Republican politician but an average person. Now imagine she was black. What do you think conservatives would have to say about her? "Typical, urban youth with no sense of responsibility raised with loose morals who plans to depend on the state to take care of her child." You know it. It's not within dispute. That's exactly what they would say. [...] Notice I am not blaming Bristol. Quite the opposite. People like me are the ones that defend the Bristols of the world. It is conservatives like James Dobson, Rush Limbaugh and yes, Governor Palin who usually attack people who find themselves in Bristol's situation. They demand a dogmatic adherence to moral strictures and chastise and belittle women who have children out of wedlock. Especially if they are women of color. Which brings us back to Obama. Do you think the Republicans would lay off of Obama if his 17 year-old daughter had gotten pregnant out of wedlock? You know the answer to that question. Everyone does. "This is what the permissive liberal attitude gets you. If you allow your children to think everything is acceptable, they have no boundaries. They wind up getting themselves in trouble like this. It's a predictable result of the liberal lifestyle." And that's before the subtle and not so subtle racial implications are brought into this. There is a constant double-standard of how black and white people and politicians are covered in this country. When a young black girl gets pregnant, she's looking to get money from welfare. When a young white woman gets pregnant, she made an unfortunate mistake and her family is being supportive in trying to help the make the best of it.

LatashaWillis

Sep 2 2008

McCain is like an old broke down man or woman who has outlived his or her usefulness as a handsome/beautiful leader and/or beauty queen but wants to make one last run as Mr. or Ms. America before shutting it down completely. He is dressed in lavish outer-wear and has had plastic surgery to fool one into thinking he still has real beauty and worth to represent us. To a blind, addicted or drunk person the more you drank and snort the better he looks, but once you come down from the high and get close enough to see him up close, you know nothing is there but an old frail and worn out used-to-be who needs rest and relaxation before heading home to be with his maker. Once altheimer sets in on McCain, we will be left with "failin' Palin" to lead us further astray and to hell if not overthrow. We've had 8 years of nuts running the country. We don't need any more nuts. Failin' Palin's squeaky voice is likely to make someone want to bomb us just to shut her up.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

Totally, L.W. We all know that it were a daughter of Obama's, the right would be in overdrive over single mothers, a strategy that was perfected during the Reagan administration. I really like this graf: Notice I am not blaming Bristol. Quite the opposite. People like me are the ones that defend the Bristols of the world. It is conservatives like James Dobson, Rush Limbaugh and yes, Governor Palin who usually attack people who find themselves in Bristol's situation. They demand a dogmatic adherence to moral strictures and chastise and belittle women who have children out of wedlock. Especially if they are women of color. What I don't like, though, is that Huffington Post is calling Bristol's boyfriend "baby daddy" in the headline on the right side. This is no better than FOX calling Michelle Obama a "baby mama." Both are destructive, and disgusting. Certain people on both extremes make it near impossible to have an intelligent conversation about issues that matter.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

I am not concerned about Palin's baby's dad any more than I am about where Big Foot is (i was joking earlier). I am concerned that the focus on just telling teenagers to abstain (just say no) rather than providing information about contraception exaccerbates these kind of problems and conjures a legitimate question about the judgement of all the right wingnuts. Is the concept of "just abstain --- don't worry about condoms" really in the best interest of children and those who are vulnerable to STDs? That hocus pocus stuff doesn't really work.

FreeClif

Sep 2 2008

John Kerry and Michael Dukakis tried to fight the devil without getting down in the hole. It didn't work. The public wants to see extreme fighting. If you don't do it they will call you weak and vote for the other side. We've seen it happen many times thus far. Our future is at hand. We gotta kill the devil by getting down in the hole and choking, scratching, cutting and shooting him to death. We all know who the devil is by now.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

That is what Biden is for. Barack may have a knife at the gun fight, but I believe Biden will be packing heat --- he is not in danger of being labeled an angry black man.

FreeClif

Sep 2 2008

Huffington Post is calling Bristol's boyfriend "baby daddy" in the headline on the right side. This is no better than FOX calling Michelle Obama a "baby mama." Well, I agree that it is a stupid term to use either way if you want to be taken seriously, but the term implies that the parents of the baby aren't married. Bristol's boyfriend isn't her "husband," he is her "baby's daddy." The Obama's, on the other hand, were married for years before they had children, so the term doesn't fit - unless you are a racist pig (Malkin, FoxNews) that thinks it is funny to use the term because it sounds "black."

Tre

Sep 2 2008

It IS a slang term associated with single parenthood; however, I agree with Ladd that the left should not wallow down in a similar (though not the same) level of slop that muddies the dialogue (oink). (I used to spend the summers on my grandparents' farm so I get these hokey farm analogies sometimes.)

FreeClif

Sep 2 2008

That white girl shouldn't be treated any better than black and other girls have been traditionally treated in like or similar positions or circumstances, no matter the reason. To do so is unfair. Let's stop treating all of them distastefully - white, black or other, or treat them all in a distasteful or disrespectful manner.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

Tre, I know FOX was playing the race card when they used "baby mama" for a black woman, and the term didn't fit at all. So that was a double-whammy of hatefulness. And Huff Post is probably using it to throw back at the Republicans who complain about "baby daddies" when they're black, but give respect when they're white "boyfriends," as in this case. But that doesn't mean it's not wallowing in the mud down with the hogs if you know what I mean. (I love me a good farm analogy, too, Whitley. I've seen many a chicken's neck rung and hog slaughtered; it's probably why I'm vegetarian today—proving that even if you grow up poaching and roasting moose, you don't have to keep doing it. OK, that sentence spun out of control ).

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

I noticed a female Clinton supporter at the convention who was asked what she would do after Hillary's speech on Tuesday and she said that since Hillary said to support Barack, then that is what she would do. They respect her leadership. I think Barack's supporters would do well to respect his leadership on this issue: leave the children alone. It was apalling when the right wingnuts attack Chelsea Clinton. We must be better than those shameless hypocrites.

FreeClif

Sep 2 2008

I agree with you, Walt. I do not believe, however, that we change anything by bringing the discourse down to the worse level to be "fair." Let's lift it—while at the same time pointing out the hypocrisy over and over again until they start to get it.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

I'm not saying attack Palin's daughter. I'm certainly not saying Barack or Biden or any sifnificant Democrat should mention, handle or deal with the matter of Palin's daughter. I'm just saying the press or others compelled to deal with the matter shouldn't treat her daughter any better than others are traditionally treated. Otherwise, it looks like nothing was really wrong until a so-called important white girl wounded up in the position. Too often this is how sitautions are finally recognized and fixed - when whites are involved. Everyone else is foodder to be discarded and ignored. Persoanlly, I don't appreciate this reality.

Walt

Sep 2 2008

I am not sure I see the hypocrisy in Mrs. Palin's daughter being pregnant. Maybe if the aforementioned Veep candidate had encouraged her daughter to have sex outside of matrimony while espousing abstinence publicly then I could see it or if she had touted abortion to her own daughter after the pregnancy became known. But that's not the case. Anyone with children will tell you that it's hard to get them to do what you want 'em to do no matter how much you preach, threaten, cajole or bribe. I also don't believe that this situation should automatically make her unfit to serve. I believe this is just more static to keep any kind of discussion about real issues that affect our lives on the back burner. The major news outlets know that any kind of substantive debate on the real issues of the day is boring to most of their viewers.

WMartin

Sep 2 2008

"Persoanlly, I don't appreciate this reality." quoth Walt. That is why I reject your reality and substitute my own.

WMartin

Sep 2 2008

Okay. You can totally hate me but I can't stop myself. I'm a Democrat on the ATTACK. Barak is a much better person than me...but, we knew that already didn't we? ;) This might be the night Bristol got knocked up. Alls I'm saying is that this stuff is about to EXPLODE. McCain cannot run on most of the platform he has chosen if this gets thrown into the fray.

Lori G

Sep 2 2008

I don't think her daughter's pregnancy makes her unfit to serve. Her position as an extreme radical-right secessionist who uses her position to go after her enemies, and could be impeached in her own state, is more the problem I have with her as vice president. However, this does show the hypocrisy of a party, and candidates, who bash single mothers and their families and believe in failed abstinence-only policies.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

I think her own family has shown her personally that abstinence-only policies don't work. Never mind the billion dollar government studies that say the same thing. I think the best thing that someone posted above (I think it was L.W.) was "imagine if she were black." I blame Jamie Lynn Spears. :)

Lori G

Sep 2 2008

I understand the stud is in route to the twin cities even as we speak, to be with the family.....yea right like he's got a choice with "Maw" Palin after his Ba**s........... Bet they'll hold the "weddin", shotgun and all, right up on the rostrum during prime time. Will the bride wear white.......????

atlntaexile

Sep 2 2008

"Will the bride wear white.......????" Is this really fodder for politics?

MAllen

Sep 2 2008

"Will the bride wear white.......????" Is this really fodder for politics? Fodder for politics? Maybe, maybe not ... but it's really funny.

WMartin

Sep 2 2008

Let's keep this discussion serious and tasteful, please.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

Here are the actual GOP talking points on how to deal with the Palin family revelations, as posted here: INTERNAL DOCUMENT - NOT TO BE EMAILED BEYOND CURRENT DISTRIBUTION LIST Please see the following points on Gov. Palin's family. Listen for them during the Convention: * Governor Palin and her husband Todd have a loving family and their children mean everything to them. When their oldest daughter Bristol came to them with news that she was expecting a child they embraced her and gave her nothing but unconditional love and support. * This is a very personal matter for the family. We should all respect the love they have for the child and the desire all parents would have for their children's privacy. * The media should respect Bristol's privacy. That's always been the tradition and practice when it comes to the children of candidates. * (If pressed) The children of candidates do not choose to run for office and be thrust into the spotlight.

DonnaLadd

Sep 2 2008

Wow, it is nice of them to be so high minded these days- but this person remembered some stuff said about Chelsea: sadly no With all the right-wing finger wagging about the inviolate right of children of candidates and officials to be above comment, I thought we might fire up the flux capacitor and travel back to that distant time in the past when Chelsea Clinton's parents were in the White House and see what the right-wing was saying about Chelsea: John McTheusalah: Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno. Vicodin Rush Limbaugh: Columnist Molly Ivins reported (Arizona Republic 10/17/93) 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. Chelsea Clinton is 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?" Immediately after the comment, Big Head DC has learned, people in the Clinton camp were angered — and the network began receiving angry e-mails and calls from viewers suggesting it was an inappropriate way for a reporter to refer to a former First Daughter. 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 More at link...

Rico

Sep 2 2008

I can appreciate the "wanting to take the high road" tone of this conversation but Palin herself is on the cover of OK! Magazine and InTouch Magazine this week. These are supermarket tabloids. The day the Repubs don't insult ME by putting a VP candidate on magazines that personify the celebrity-obsessed culture of this country instead of SERIOUSLY introducing this woman to the country, is the day I stop being so damnn NICE. I'm sorry. This woman isn't "seriously" being put up as a candidate. This woman is being used for who she is-not what she knows and can actually give to this country. In that facet, I think that ALL of the things going on in her life-not to mention the fact that the OK! story is all about her deciding to "keep" her unborn Down Syndrome baby-are going to become "fodder for politics". They will become "fodder for politics" because the Repub machine is throwing them out there into market tabloids touting her "personal decisions". If they are going to make her nomination about her "personal decisions" then we have the right to debate her "personal decisions". If it HASN'T become fodder for politics and something that is worth discussion, why is there this blog entry and over 97 comments underneath it?

Lori G

Sep 3 2008

I looked just briefly at the GOP (aka Gone Off Politically party or as Scooter Libby calls it the Getting off Politically party if not legally, or as I recently deemed the convention, the Farce on Minnesota) Convention last night and it made me so sick I threw up. I saw Laura "cat-eyes" Bush, Cindy "no pain, no gain" McCain, Joe 'two-faced/turncoating/perpertrating" Lieberman and ex-mayor Fruity "big ears' Guilliana skinning, grinning, lying and looking for the next wife. Then I heard Bush make a few dense comments as only he can. If I'm not mistaken, he said we need McCain to take this country on where he and Cheney planned to take it. He went on the say the GOP is more loved now than ever. I think he forgot he was speaking to the people of America. I'm wondering if he hasn't started back using that yack. Anyway, I agree philosopically and morally with Donna and WMartin about not badmouthing Bristol unnecessarily. I just don't like the timing and occasion for it. That's my personal issue though.

Walt

Sep 3 2008

Obama was on the cover of OK! Magazine last week(before Palin), so I guess that makes him not a serious candidate.

BubbaT

Sep 3 2008

Great commentary Lori. The repugs are trying to stir up and rally the religious right. I'm so tired of those sorry sapsuckers being called the religious right when they're nothing but a bunch of phony loonies. They have more inside and outside and freaky sex than the republican Congress. Take for example Revern "Massauge Me Good" Haggard, Revern "How Much Will it Cost Me For You to Shake When You Walk, Baby" Swaggart, Revern "I Make Good Love to Myself" Aldridge, for examples. I won't ever mention Vitter, et al.

Walt

Sep 3 2008

We know what you mean, Lori. Don't sweat the small talk. You're cooking without any grease and they can't stand it. When you touch them they can't stand it. Good God.

Walt

Sep 3 2008

Would it amaze you BubbaT for me to say I don't agree with that EITHER? I don't walk a line here. I have issues with a lot of stuff on both sides. Palin just seems to be bothering me the most now. They have more inside and outside and freaky sex than the republican Congress. Thanks R-Walt...that made me laugh out loud.

Lori G

Sep 3 2008

Missing the point entirely, WeMartin wrote about not being able to see the hypocrisy in Bristol Palin's pregnancy. That was not the point. The point is that right wingnuts said negative things and cracked nasty jokes about Chelsea Clinton but have their panties all bunched up when left wingnuts attack Bristol Palin. Those who live in glass houses should shut up, reduce their stance in the toilets, focus on their own families, leave the little page boys alone and quit acting like they are morally superior ---enough!

FreeClif

Sep 3 2008

However, I will turn to the Farce on Minnesota tonight to see if failin', derailin' and portayin' Palin will let her hair down, step from behind the podium, reach out and grab something, then get jiggy with it, as the prophet Bubba so elegantly and eloquently suggested she looks like she could. I'll watch that. For there comes a time brothers and sisters when politics and division should pause so that good works shall be done.

Walt

Sep 3 2008

Lori, I was just messing with you. :) I was wrong about Obama being on the cover first, they have 2 different covers and issues this week according to their website. While both magazines are tabloids, I can see why both candidates would be on the cover. For the exposure, it doesn't matter to either party if it printed on a roll of toliet paper as long as it gets their candidates picture out there for the public to see. But I do agree with you.

BubbaT

Sep 3 2008

Walt you made me spit my coffee on my keyboard.

BubbaT

Sep 3 2008

L.A. times article suggests that Palin hates our freedoms (she is for banning books and intervening in the privacy of others) and hate crime laws: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-rutten3-2008sep03,0,2319099.column?track=ntothtml

FreeClif

Sep 3 2008

What if this is not repub hypocrisy? The McCain campaign has stated that they knew about all this before they picked her. So doesn't it stand to reason that they would foresee all this? I watched Senator Obama's speech last Thursday and I thought it was fantastic. If that is what the man truly believes then He doesn't just deserve to be in the White House, we all need him there. When I woke up Friday afternoon (I worked the night shift all last week) I was disappointed that McCain had stolen all of his thunder. And to make matters worse what is everyone talking about now? Nothing of any value to our country, but of all things the drama surrounding the teen aged daughter of the presumptive veep candidate. It's all a little too convenient. I hate to sound like Walt but I think it's all a smoke screen to divert people's attention until November so when they go into the voting booth it's won't be about who has the best plan for the country but about the white guy versus the black guy with the different sounding name.

WMartin

Sep 3 2008

WMartin, I believe you are exactly right. They say they knew all this, which would mean this WAS a calculated distraction. THAT is the only way they can win. Distract from the real issues. Is THIS how you put COUNTRY FIRST? It is more of the same crass opportunism that shows a low opinion of the ability of average Americans to see through these silly distractions.

FreeClif

Sep 3 2008

Quigley has it ALL figured out here: http://pundits.thehill.com/2008/09/02/how-the-palins’-pregnancy-issue-could-hurt-obama/

FreeClif

Sep 3 2008

Talk about Grand Ole Party (of Hypocrites)?: Maureen Dowd reminds us of past denigration of out of wedlock pregnancy by GOP: "Vice President Dan Quayle denounced Murphy Brown for having a baby out of wedlock, bemoaning a 'poverty of values.'"

FreeClif

Sep 3 2008

Whitley, I hate to admit it but I share that same low opinion of the average American. It's why the plan is working. The Democrats and Obama had the highest ratings of any political convention in a very long time, if not ever. So what happened? I am no dyed in the wool Democrat. I have voted for Republicans probably more than Democrats. I agree with a lot of the fiscal principles of conservatism with a lot of social liberalism thrown in there. Obama moved me with his speech. It was what I was waiting for someone to say and I don't believe I am the only one who feels that way. I wish I could shake the populous as a whole and get them to wake up and realize that life is happening as we are glued to our T.V's waiting for the next episode of who knocked up who.

WMartin

Sep 3 2008

Quigley has it ALL figured out here: [snip] He makes some interesting points. It's clearer to me now that the Palin choice was a shrewd strategic move. It could still blow up in McCain's face, but for now it appears to have given his campaign more attention in the last 5 days, good and bad, then it has received in the last 6 months.

Jeff Lucas

Sep 3 2008

Washington Post: Palin Slashed Funding for Teen Moms: laska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice-presidential nominee who revealed Monday that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, earlier this year used her line-item veto to slash funding for a state program benefiting teen mothers in need of a place to live. After the legislature passed a spending bill in April, Palin went through the measure reducing and eliminating funds for programs she opposed. Inking her initials on the legislation -- "SP" -- Palin reduced funding for Covenant House Alaska by more than 20 percent, cutting funds from $5 million to $3.9 million. Covenant House is a mix of programs and shelters for troubled youths, including Passage House, which is a transitional home for teenage mothers. According to Passage House's web site, its purpose is to provide "young mothers a place to live with their babies for up to eighteen months while they gain the necessary skills and resources to change their lives" and help teen moms "become productive, successful, independent adults who create and provide a stable environment for themselves and their families."

DonnaLadd

Sep 3 2008

"Let's keep this discussion serious and tasteful, please"....understood. Sorry. Now...last night we were treated to a "discource from the nations laziest polititian who slept through most of his primary run and followed by....the nations dullest....after that our President "W" ...gave an eight minute video address from his white paneled bunker. Come on repubs give me some meat here....!!! Something we can chew on. These soft vegtables are underscoring the geriatric aspect of this thing. The Democratic Convention was non stop. That's why his bounce is lasting and growing. Next to what we are being treated to here, Obama is youth, Life, Dynamics.

atlntaexile

Sep 3 2008

The 3.9 million was an increase of 2.7 million in grant money from the year before according to The Covenant House's own fiancial disclosures. http://covenanthouseak.org/pdfs/Financials/Fiscal%20Year%202007.pdf She didn't slash funding for Teen mothers she just cut the budget increase from 5 million to 3.9 million.

BubbaT

Sep 3 2008

Oh, a cut is not a slash. I see. In her defense, She is probably an honorable woman. It is probably not that she did not care about the need for additional funds for pregnant teens, but she just didn't "get it". Some teens don't have well to do mothers who can take care of them and their newborns. Some end up homeless and exploited by predators.

FreeClif

Sep 3 2008

The Conenant House is expanding and asked for 5 million increase in their govt. grant to build new buildings and other programs not to fund the teen pregnancy program. They got 3.9 million. That's not a cut/slash. They only had 12 teen mothers in their program in 2007 anyway. Page 9 http://www.legfin.state.ak.us/BudgetReports/GetBackupDocuments.php?Year=2008&Type=proj&Number=48722&NumberType=LFD

BubbaT

Sep 3 2008

Covenant House may be like Hinds County Project Early Head Start. We provide pre-natal care and early childhood education targeting pregnant teens. They get prenatal care and when the child is born they enter center based Early Head Start (age six weeks up to age three). It is expensive to provide prenatal care, social workers and teachers with Bachelors degrees in early childhood education. We only have slots for 32 children/mothers-to-be; however, IF WE HAD MORE BUILDING SPACE and money we could serve many more because our waiting list is long. Perhaps it is not that some people don't get, but that they just don't WANT to get it!

FreeClif

Sep 3 2008

Covenant House is a private non-profit agency it's not part of the Health and Human Service like Head Start.

BubbaT

Sep 3 2008

Your implication is wrong. No Head Start operating agencies are PART of HHS --- almost all are non-profits like Covenant House. The federal Dept. of HHS is a source of MOST funding for Early Head Start; however, that funding in 99% of cases is provided in grants to private non-profit organizations like Hinds County Human Resource Agency which operates Head Start in Hinds County. That funding is combined in many instances with state, local and foundation funds. In our case we are a quasi-public private non-profit. The only non-federal assistance we receive is from the Hinds County Board of Supervisors (about 1% of our budget --- if that). We receive no state assistance. There are other Head Start programs in more progressive states that receive significant funding from their county, city and state governments to enable them to serve more families.

FreeClif

Sep 3 2008

Most Head Starts are private non-profits? You learn something new every day...

LatashaWillis

Sep 3 2008

I thought Head Start was part of the HHS because it listed on their website as one of their services.

BubbaT

Sep 3 2008

I understand the confusion. Many non-profits receive federal grants to administer federally supported services. For instance we also get federal funds through a program called LIHEAP to provide assistance to people who have trouble paying their light bills. That program is a federally supported government service, but that does not make LIHEAP service PROVIDERS a part of the federal government. It is similar to Medicaid which is a federal service, but the services are usually PROVIDED by private for-profit or non-profit, non-federal entities. Catholic Charities is a faith based private non-profit that also has received federal funds to carry out programs supported by the federal government. That does not make Catholic Charities a part of the federal government. We remain private non-profit entities.

FreeClif

Sep 3 2008