I completely agree with Obama that families should be off limits, and I have been more than a little dismayed by what I called the panty sniffing that occurred over the week-end. I see no difference between what happened this week-end with Palin, culminating with the news of her daughter, and the Obama birth certificate crap or the Edwards affair crusade spear-headed by alleged goat lover Mickey Kaus. I am glad Obama has said no to this crap, and I really hope people listen.
Having said that, I am not going to sit by and let jackasses like Hugh Hewitt and company sit around and publish their deep thoughts and reader emails asserting the moral superiority of… out of wedlock teen pregnancies. Not only is it an absurd position (pregnant daughters as the new family value is a touch rich, guys), but off limits is off limits, you partisan hacks.
zak
I thought it was a nice touch when Obama pointed out that his mother was 18 when she had him. It puts some oomph behind what might otherwise be an empty, if classy, gesture. And who knows, maybe it will help the Dems close the pregnant teenager gap.
Gold Star for Robot Boy
C’mon, John, what did you expect?
Did you really think the right wouldn’t try to score points off this?
You’re smarter than that.
Notorious P.A.T.
I would say Hugh Hewitt is dumb as a post, if I didn’t have such high respect for posts.
Foobar
Bristol Palin deserves all the privacy she can get (one can seriously question, however, what type of parents accept something like the VP nomination knowing full well that it will put their daughter in a seriously difficult situation).
Sarah Palin, however, does not deserve the same consideration. Gwen Ifil (the moderator at the upcoming VP debate) will not be doing her job unless she quizzes Sarah Palin on how she believes teen pregnancies should best be reduced — and whether measures should include sex ed or merely an admonishment to be abstinent.
LiberalTarian
It’s time to go after McCain, full throttle. All Palin’s family drama aside, she was selected, not elected. It does look like the Obama-Biden campaign needs to get some voices on the air talking about the care he puts into vetting people for important positions.
A Democratic surrogate could even score points by points out how glad he is the politics of personal destruction have really gone away with this pick, but how it highlights even more what the real qualifications of government are: judgment, thoughtfulness, planning, policy.
Obama could hit the GOP on how truly afraid everyone was of Gustav, and that we are not in any way convinced the Federal Government is prepared for a major natural disaster (let alone a terrorist attack). Why was NorthCom the lead agency and not FEMA??? Krugman nailed it–I hope the Obama camp was paying attention.
calipygian
Sullivan is an asshole, but he’s a hundred percent correct to say that if POW guy was too stupid to vet his pick properly, then he can’t be suprised when the internet does it for him.
RSA
Apparently, according to Hugh Hewitt, personal family decisions are off limits–except when you want to praise those decisions. Let me give it a shot. I’m happy for the Palin family, and, more broadly, I applaud the example that Sarah and Todd Palin have set for the rest of us: extra-marital sex and a baby out of wedlock are not a sign of the destruction of the nuclear family in America.
ThymeZone
I agree with Obama that for politicians and cable hacks to be blathering about pregnant daughters is declasse, rude, and not conducive to a proper political dialogue.
But context is everything, this is Greater Blogovia, and specifically, the District of Hot Air, and we are in the land of Anything Goes (well, almost anything).
So it makes me pret – ty uncomfortable to be seeing bloggers saying that something is off limits in blogville.
I know that nobody really means off limits, but even as a theatrical figure of speechy device thingy, it rankles.
Don’t TELL me that Mister Magoo can pick an unvetted dingbat as a running mate and then tell me what aspects of her life or career I am allowed to lampoon.
Just don’t. Pretty please? And ladies, enough with the sexism pearlclutching, already? Christ on a cheese platter, get some thick skin already.
PeterJ
There’s no need to talk about it. The McCain campaign decided to release their August numbers today. And they are impressive. $47 million. I bet they would have wanted to keep that number secret a while longer and being able to use for some other bad news, but instead the released them now to cushion the latest news.
Joshua Norton
Now we know why she’s such a 2nd Amendment nut-job. Shotguns, no doubt, play an integral part of Palin family wedding preparations.
PC
“Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father.” – John McCain
jake
1. Camp McPalintine decided to break this story. 2. It concerns a third person not either of the candidates. Not that they had much choice. Unless they wanted to send the child to Barrow until after the election.
I kan haz Who Spewitt v. Purity Brigade Smackdaown?
Rosali
Frist was rightfully criticized for medically diagnosing Terry Schiavo by looking at a video. I’m not sure why people felt comfortable diagnosing pregnancies or lack thereof by looking at photographs.
1jpb
Hugh and friends are forgetting (don’t give a damn?) that kids are listening.
The rote praise of Bristol (to win political points) is unwise. Of course, love and acceptance should be stressed. But, this needs to, at the very least, be equally balanced with warnings and discussion of poor judgment and ramifications.
Hormonally driven young adults don’t need more encouragement (intentional or not) from older folks–who are in a position to look at the big picture, and pass that wisdom and clarity to the younger among us.
Stuck in the Fun House (nj)
This is predictable GB smirks. We’re going to hear all about how the liberal satanists have corrupted our angelic christian girls. But never mind, the strength of our Godliness with overcome their heathen teachings.
voice of reason
I agree that her family is off limits, but only for tactical reasons. If going after her family would work, we should do it. If lying would work, we should do it. Literally ANY means are legitimate for destroying McCain, Palin, movement conservatism, and neo-conservatism.
Frankly lies, character assassination, and the like are nothing compared to the massive political violence that will probably be necessary (and justified) to wipe these vermin from the face of the earth.
Stuck in the Fun House (nj)
Jesus, please forgive my shitty writing skills.
TR
Agreed. The press needs to move off this, pronto.
That said, the day’s events on underscore how poorly they vetted Palin. The first day of the Republican National Convention, and the newly-tapped vice presidential nominee (1) announces her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant and (2) has to lawyer up to fend off a state investigation into her own misconduct.
Sheesh.
Ripley
Hugh Hewitt is on the front lines*, you bastard! The FRONT LINES!
* Radio studio in the Empire State Building. Still… !
BP
I’ll weigh in on ThymeZone’s side. It’s true that this is not the kind of thing those running for office, together with T.V. “analysts” and other hacks, should be spending time discussing. However, until the Republicans stop their perpetual posing as the self-righteous guardians of “family values,” it’s important for some of us to point out that they are no more “moral,” and in many cases are much less so, than the rest of us.
pj
What this is now about – clearly – is maturity and common sense.
Since McCain’s campaign claims they knew about it, he should have had the common sense NOT to offer the VP slot to Palin. If one could make the argument that she truly was the “best person for the job” someone with the experience of a Condi Rice (not pitching Condi but she is qualified) then likely you let the candidate make the decision. However, since that argument is unavailing, then you have to ask what kind of common sense did McCain show offering the job to a mother with a newborn special needs baby and a unmarried teenage daughter who is pregnant and having no sense – with little vetting – that she could handle the pressure. A leader puts people in situations they can handle and succeed at, without collateral damage.
Similarly with Governor Palin, isn’t it fair to question her judgment and commitment to her family when attempting to balance family versus career. If she has had the good sense to discourage the VP talk, and even if she couldn’t discourage it, refuse the offer, wouldn’t she have been much better off? She still would have been a rising star in the Republican political establishment and with patience and time could likely have risen to been one of the leaders of the party – again without collateral damage
For both it shows an unbridled egotism, lack of maturity or any common sense.
Koz
Anyone who wants to think Hugh Hewitt is a source of brain-dead flackery isn’t going to get an argument from me.
But let’s point out that the Bristol Palin story was that she was supposedly the mother of Trig, which seems to me to be way out there in the tinfoil hat zone. Now that we know what the story really is, I think it’s fair to say that the role of grandparents wrt single parenthood is in general a legit subject as long as it isn’t too personal to Bristol, about whom we don’t know very much anyway.
Koz
Some voice of reason.
Ned Raggett
John, I’m surprised you let this one go over at Hewitt’s piece:
Oh my.
Krista
You do realize with whom you’re speaking, right? If I had a thin skin for that type of thing, I’d have been out of here long ago. But I know that for the most part, the commenters here are a good bunch. That’s not going to stop me from protesting when the atmosphere here starts to feel less like a fun gathering and more like something rather ugly.
Freedom of speech goes both ways, TZ. People here have the right to say whatever they like. And I have every right to speak up when I don’t like what’s being said.
Don’t like it? Pie-filter me or just don’t read my comments.
John Cole
Paging Just Some Fuckhead:
Thanks for playing. Morons.
myiq2xu
The disgusting thing about Obama’s statement today is that he even had to make it.
Sloegin
This is a car wreck of a story and we’re all Jerry Springer audience members. There’s so many other juicy things here to burn McCain on; the Trooper-gate, the AIP membership, and god knows what else. We’re stuck on this one.
Joshua Norton
An “unnamed McCain advisor” who probably planted the
“despicable rumors” himself so another “unnamed McCain advisor” could come along and “find” them.
Karmakin
I think that you can’t avoid this but so much. Mainly because this sort of thing really is an important social and cultural issue, one that does manifest itself in an ongoing political context.
I think that “slut-shaming” is of course, 100% wrong. Completely, utterly wrong. However, most of the criticism and commentary regarding this avoids that sort of thing.
I think there’s concern for Bristol and the possibility she’s having her future thrown under the bus so her mother can score some ideological points, even if she doesn’t realize it.
liberal
John Cole wrote,
Put aside whether it’s good tactics to go after her (probably not, because of blowback). And put aside whether, in the big picture, it’s that important (as compared to, say, the issue of the likelihood of McThug bombing Iran or getting us into a shooting war with Georgia).
On the legitimacy of going after the family:
(1) If the Downs baby is indeed Sarah Palin’s, then she demonstrated remarkable recklessness in flying back to Alaska after her water broke. The comments about “how can she be VP and deal with a disabled infant” are silly and sexist—the same issue would confront a male VP, and presumably (like a male VP) she could hire someone to help take care of the baby while she attended to affairs of state. However, the plane ride back is another matter.
(2) If the Downs baby was her daughter’s—IMHO this is less dismaying than (1)—then the main issue is that she’s warped and has problems with honesty regarding family and sexual matters. Legit to go after that, because of the right’s agenda regarding sexual morality.
(3) Let’s suppose the Downs kid is Sarah’s, and now Sarah’s daughter is really pregnant. As a poster here at Balloon Juice and a blogger over at The American Prospect noted, the announcement was worded in terms of the daughter choosing to keep the child. Yet, if SP’s “pro-life” agenda became law, the daughter would have no choice, even as a victim of incest or rape. So if SP et al. don’t think such matters should be for individuals and families to decide, then they should be prepared to face questions concerning their own circumstances.
Again, not saying it’s wise tactics or as important as McThug’s hawkishness, but…
SGEW
Would you torture someone in order to gain damaging info on McCain’s background?
Would you as****nate the candidate?
Someone call the U.S.S.S., and get this guy out of public debate, please.
D. Mason
Hey, I think I agree with you for the first time.
It’s insane that the McCain camp should try to hang the rank speculation of a few blog commenters on Obama or his campaign staff, but they did. The fact that Obama has to address the swill that gets passed around blog comments is disgusting indeed. When will McCain stop taking the low road? I have no idea but I wish like hell the media had the integrity to call him on it.
pj
Yes, we’re stuck on this one.
Democrats almost always win on issues, but for 30 years The Republicans have always won on issues of character.
I’m not suggesting that the campaign should be one of character, but if that continues to be the playbook, then you fight back – not with mudslinging against a teenager – but with what I just said above, maturity, common sense and judgment.
Studly Pantload
You Know Who sez:
And again, I refuse to be askeered of what some mean ol’ sumbitch righty sez about the discourse of the left as we attempt to determine what’s in-bounds and to what degree. They blamed us – us!! – for one-half second of Janet Jackson’s studded nip on prime-time TV, and they’ll keep blaming us for everything that doesn’t bite back. And believe me, I’m all for biting back.
Meanwhile, as TR noted: Sarah Palin: Lawyered up, and ready to go!
jnfr
I wish the daughter well and otherwise am not concerned with her. I do know that Palin herself is on record as favoring abstinence-only eduation as the only form of sex education allowable. And I think it’s fair game to ask her why she feels that way, when abstinence-only ed has such a poor track record for preventing teen pregnancies.
dslak
He doesn’t mean what you think he means.
4tehlulz
Cheney would.
Stuck in the Fun House (nj)
Now we’re using unnamed MCcain advisors as support for our positions. Sounds so, Clintonesue. He also said that Obama dissed Hurricane victims because he mentioned something else while having a selfish campaign event. Come on. If you don’t like offensive words then make a list and ban them or the people who say them. Quit this, Oh but it hurts Obama crapola.
LiberalTarian
I did. Unfortunately, it is on my kidneys, which apparently a bad thing.
Listen, you wanna drool over Ms. Alaska, you go ahead.
I will, however, call you a Republican troll trying to make liberals look bad.
It’s the blogosphere dontcha know–anything goes. ;)
SGEW
When taking the high road starts winning elections. In other words, after Nov. 5th, 2008, when Barack Obama becomes the president-elect.
Not that it’ll help “my friend” McCain, but there you go.
Steve S.
Yes, families are off limits. That is, unless they are required as cheap visual props in this squalid, neverending debacle known as the American political process. Gosh, aren’t those children just adorable? Look at them up there on that stage, dressed so nicely! Little Sasha, Malia, Trig, Track, Piper, Boomerang, whatever their names are, such perfect little dolls, I want to just give them the biggest hugs and vote for their parents! Oh, except the rules change when we find out that the little rascals are — what’s the term I’m looking for? — oh yeah, human beings. Then their trademarks as commodities expire and they are “off limits”.
Eff this whole nauseating process. Not just the slime about pregnant teenagers but the feelgood photo ops, too.
Just Some Fuckhead
Christ John, yer only about twelve hours late. The Drudgereport link to a Townhall.com post by Amanda Carpenter ended with (sadly I can’t find the graf now) the thought:
Liberal bloggers have been saying these things on blogs that also use Obama’s name.
Damn, that is hard-hitting shit. Amanda also treated us to this last Tuesday:
Another Radical Obama Association
Old videos appear to show a radical Muslim named Khalid Al-Mansour helped Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama gain acceptance into Harvard Law….
Shit, the crazy things rightwingers will say is mindblowing. Oops, I got sidetracked there. What was your point again John?
LiberalTarian
You know, I hear the Alaska GOP are the haters that put out the Palin pregnancy stories. How bad off are you when your own party in your own state hates you?
Speaking of being hated by your own party–a real dearth of news re Ron Paul and Bob Barr. What? They aren’t conservative enough to cover???
capelza
One thing I wish from this whole kerfuffle is that the Culture Warriors will now shut the fuck up about everyone else’s moral failings. And get out of our bedrooms and OBGYN offices and schools
Years have been eaten up by “family values”, decades. Yet no matter what they think should happen nice young girls still get pregnant and we still go to war.
It’s all we’ve asked for decades and NOW they want US out their bedrooms and OBGYN offices because the reality of family life actually isn’t what they’ve been wasting all these years over.
Cathy in Portland
So there’s swirling gossip in the blogosphere about Sarah Palin’s fifth child, and the McCain/Palin campaign chooses to deal with the issue by catapulting it into the MSM, and announces that Bristol is pregnant and names the young man in the press release. Man that is a strange, strange notion of privacy. They had other options a) ignore the gossip, b) release a birth certificate, c) release medical records, d) etc, and McCain/Palin deals with it by outing the daughter and the boyfriend!!!
This is just bizarre on every level.
michael
Did John McCain respect Chelsea Clinton’s privacy when she was a child in the whitehouse??? Wasn’t McCain fmous for horrible tasteless Chelsea Clinton and Janet Reno jokes???
SGEW
Remember:
60 P.U.M.A.s in an airport motel = ground-breaking political news!
More people at Ron Paul’s event than at the actual R.N.C. = a non-story.
Thanks for playing! And who’s this “Babar” guy that the I.T. guy at work was talking about? I thought the Republicans where the elephants? Now I iz all confuzed.
Genine
Oh, please. I think the women regulars on this blog are made of studier stuff than that! I know I am.
You don’t like what someone had to say? That’s fine. Just as I and some others don’t like some other things being said. Its hardly pearl-clutching.
In fact, I’d say what you and some others are doing is pearl-clutching. Jeez Louise!
Sondra
Staying away from this issue is really not possible at this point and unfortunately her daughter is going to dragged into it because this is the woman who lives and believes and advocates for the kind of lack of education that her ideology demands;
Posted on: September 1, 2008 11:16 AM, by PZ Myers
Here’s the other side: Sarah Palin made some policy statements in her run for governor, so we can see what to expect. She’s pro-ignorance and anti-civil rights all the way, opposing gay marriage, sex education, and reproductive rights for women. No surprise at all, I know. Here are some answers that jumped out at me:
2. Will you support the right of parents to opt out their children from curricula, books, classes, or surveys, which parents consider privacy-invading or offensive to their religion or conscience?Why or why not?
SP: Yes. Parents should have the ultimate control over what their children are taught.
She wants kids to be taught only what the parents believe, which is a disaster for education. It dictates that the next generation can be no wiser, barring exceptional effort from the kids themselves, than the previous. This is an angle to give religion a trump card over science, and jingo priority over history, by making it easy to prevent kids from being exposed to reality.
10. Do you support the Alaska Supreme Court’s ruling that spousal benefits for state employees should be given to same-sex couples? Why or why not?Why or why not?
SP: No, I believe spousal benefits are reserved for married citizens as defined in our constitution.
The constitution once reserved voting rights to men, and allowed people to be held as slaves. So?
And this last one is simply hilarious.
11. Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
SP: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.
See Question 2 above. Do we really want stupid people dictating what people should learn?
________________________________________
Here’s another answer from Palin that suddenly has more significance:
3. Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?
SP: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.
Now, are you ready to hear this?
Sarah and Todd Palin say their 17-year-old unmarried daughter is pregnant.The couple said in a statement released by John McCain’s presidential campaign that Bristol will keep her baby.
I’m flummoxed. Here’s another personal issue that is none of the voters’ business, that will distract the media from discussing the issues, yet it speaks directly to Palin’s support for bad reproductive and educational policy.
PS: the Founding Father’s had nothing to do with “under G-d” in the pledge of allegiance. It was introduced by Eisenhower in 1952 during the Korean War. Everyone in my generation that got a good education knows that.
Ignorance is not bliss.
ThymeZone
WTF is that? You want to be taken seriously? Then talk seriously.
I haven’t drooled over anyone or slimed anyone nor made any remarks about babies or any of this other shit.
I have simply said that there are no “limits” to speech on the subject of Palin that anyone in this venue should be puffing up at this juncture.
What you are talking about, I have no idea, and I am not sure that you do either.
Funkhauser
There are two angles that I’ll see and support:
I want a big, long ad campaign from the Obamas: this is how John McCain picks his advisers and associates. The man has sh-t judgment. Repeat: really sh—y judgment. Do not allow this man to be president. This isn’t necessarily about Bristol or her family; Sarah Palin has several other ridiculous connections, and they never bothered to investigate. Four more years of a man who trusts his gut; trusts his gut right over the cliff.
Two, an argument that abstinence-only education doesn’t work. Doesn’t work. Doesn’t work. Don’t let religious fundamentalists hurt your kids.
Sondra
Sorry – I hit the wrong key;
Sondra Says:
Staying away from this issue is really not possible at this point and unfortunately her daughter is going to dragged into it because this is the woman who lives and believes and advocates for the kind of lack of education that her ideology demands;
Posted on: September 1, 2008 11:16 AM, by PZ Myers
Here’s the other side: Sarah Palin made some policy statements in her run for governor, so we can see what to expect. She’s pro-ignorance and anti-civil rights all the way, opposing gay marriage, sex education, and reproductive rights for women. No surprise at all, I know. Here are some answers that jumped out at me:
2. Will you support the right of parents to opt out their children from curricula, books, classes, or surveys, which parents consider privacy-invading or offensive to their religion or conscience?Why or why not?
SP: Yes. Parents should have the ultimate control over what their children are taught.
She wants kids to be taught only what the parents believe, which is a disaster for education. It dictates that the next generation can be no wiser, barring exceptional effort from the kids themselves, than the previous. This is an angle to give religion a trump card over science, and jingo priority over history, by making it easy to prevent kids from being exposed to reality.
10. Do you support the Alaska Supreme Court’s ruling that spousal benefits for state employees should be given to same-sex couples? Why or why not?Why or why not?
SP: No, I believe spousal benefits are reserved for married citizens as defined in our constitution.
The constitution once reserved voting rights to men, and allowed people to be held as slaves. So?
And this last one is simply hilarious.
11. Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
SP: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.
See Question 2 above. Do we really want stupid people dictating what people should learn?
____________________________________
Here’s another answer from Palin that suddenly has more significance:
3. Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?
SP: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.
Now, are you ready to hear this?
Sarah and Todd Palin say their 17-year-old unmarried daughter is pregnant.The couple said in a statement released by John McCain’s presidential campaign that Bristol will keep her baby.
I’m flummoxed. Here’s another personal issue that is none of the voters’ business, that will distract the media from discussing the issues, yet it speaks directly to Palin’s support for bad reproductive and educational policy.
PS: the Founding Father’s had nothing to do with “under G-d” in the pledge of allegiance. It was introduced by Eisenhower in 1952 during the Korean War. Everyone in my generation that got a good education knows that.
Ignorance is not bliss.
PC
I’m waiting for Rachel Maddow to post a pic of Bristol Palin and saying the White House may get a new dog. Oh right. IOKIYAR.
This kind of shit has been dealt out by the GOP for years. It doesn’t mean it’s right if the Dems do it, but please spare me the fainting couch if some anonymous blog commenters crack a few jokes.
Oh dear. I’m feeling faint already. Could someone get me a cold cloth?
And please don’t even go near any of the *chan boards. McCain’s campaign might die of a fucking heart attack.
SN
I say let the press at ’em. This is McCain’s fault for not vetting Palin and letting the press do his job for him. It’s going to get worse and worse; we all know the media is going to eat this up.
Can you picture the following future scenarios:
-Cameramen and reporters following Palin to the location of her deposition in the “Troopergate” investigation;
-Supermarket tabloids featuring headlines reading “Bristol’s Baby – Who is the Real Father?” or more likely “Alien Impregnated Bristol;”
-Reporters, cameramen, and helicopters trying to get the scoop on Bristol’s shotgun wedding
The Obama camp won’t have to do a thing but sit back and enjoy the contrasts of his campaign versus the McCain “Campaign Girls Gone Wild.”
Warren Terra
Sure, by all means, let’s leave off the veep nominee’s private life. It’s weird and it’s sordid, but more importantly it’s her family, not her public duties.
The important facts remain: Palin has a record of fiscal incompetence and inappropriately political personnel decisions. She has a pattern of lying about her official actions and getting caught, with documentation.
Even more importantly, John McCain is learning all this stuff for the first time along with all us nobodies on the internet, because despite tying up the nomination 6 months ago, he chose at the last minute a veep with a thin resume whom he’d barely met and who had not been vetted. Even if Palin were to magically turn out to be the ideal veep, McCain couldn’t have known that without the vetting. The lack of due diligence is the story.
LiberalTarian
WTF? Did your left nut get stuck between the toilet seat and the bowl?
You go from “stop clutching your pearls over sexist remarks” to “how dare you I never drooled over her.” Let me spell this out for you: it was a joke, said tongue in cheek. You are familiar with the concept?
Turns out you are just given to “do as I say not as I do.” That’s what I get for thinking you had a sense of humor. Shame on me. Now, please, let go of the pearls. They can only stand so much pressure.
dbrown
Off-limits – maybe but what of Edwards? Why was it ok to hound him about that child? Why wasn’t that child off limits? Like fuck it was! The rightwing fuckers aren’t honest about that child which should have been off limits. The fucking asshole media sure didn’t follow that either.
Joshua Norton
I believe the PC term is “2nd Amendment Wedding”.
ThymeZone
Oh bullshit. We endured months of completely useless churn on the subject of some imaginary “sexist” line that must never be crossed, complete with self-appointed Sexism Police who were here at every hour to decide what was sexist, make the arrest and impose sentences, all accompanied by teary self-pitying crap and waving of bloody shirts over the horrors of Rampant Sexism. I even made posts under the handle of RampantSexism to ridicule this crap, if you may recall.
It is just complete crap. If all you have in an argument is the assertion that a woman is being ridiculed and therefore it’s sexism, then honestly, just STFU. Not you, this is a general blast. The you is rhetorical.
The phony sexism card has been played out AFAIC. Palin’s va-jay-jay-ness does not make her protected from any speech whatsoever. She has been thrust into our attention as a possible Vice President of the United States from out of nowhere as a pure pander to gullible women and even more gullible evangelical shitheads, and I can say anything about her I want to say. Period.
forked tongue
Well, she won’t be doing her job then. I am afraid the chances are now zero that Ifill will touch the topic with a ten-foot pole for fear of looking too mean by even bringing it up.
Just Some Fuckhead
That’s because glibertarians don’t give a shit about government acting on behalf of the citizens, or the optics of it. Has nothing to do with enthusiasm either way.
ThymeZone
Yeah, but when the joke is lousy and disguised, you might want to label it. Sorry, I am not a mind reader.
Fuck you with your attitude. If you want to be better understood, write better.
PC
I’ll use whatever term I want, TYVM.
jake
Camp McPOW signals its intention to start a nutpicking contest.
Heh.
Ha ha ha!
Bwahahaha!
This isn’t a knife to a gun fight, this is a soggy Kleenex to a nuclear war.
ThymeZone
What PC said.
And the cowering? Oh noes, don’t be man to Palin, that’s They Want Us To Do. Those big all powerful meanies will use this against us and dash our dreams.
Fuck that. Let ‘er rip. Tear this phony, lying dumbass Alaskan bitch a new asshole and don’t hold back.
Stuck in the Fun House (nj)
Hands up against the wall buddy, You’re under arrest.
ThymeZone
er, man=mean to Palin. Or, man to Palin, if that works better for you.
ThymeZone
Is this the end of Rico?
Sasha
Yes, because, of course if Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, and his wife Michelle had a pregnant unmarried teenage daughter, the right would be *so* understanding. (hattip: Jake Tapper)
Brachiator
I agree, as long as the Republicans hold to this, which they don’t and probably won’t. I can’t help but think back at the obnoxious Fox News chiron denigrating Michelle Obama, which becomes all the more ironic now that McCain’s VP choice seems to be a hotbed of baby mammas. And of course, there is the irony of McCain embracing the very people who slimed him in his early campaign run by their disgusting suggestion that he had fathered a (gasp) black child out of wedlock.
Hugh Hewitt is just the first of many right wing pundits who will try to positively exploit the Palin family as evidence of the superiority of conservative family values. By the way, his praise of Palin as a superior VP pick reminds me that he was one of the hackiest of hacks in praising Dubya’s choice of Harriet Miers as a Supreme Court nominee.
I agree that her views on sex education as a domestic policy issue are fair game, and can be challenged without questioning her personal decisions about her own family.
No, it’s not a fair question. It’s not even a valid question. It’s just sexism.
It is odious to suggest that women with minor children have some special obligation to satisfy the public about their family situation before they can vie for higher political office.
None of these questions would come up if a male candidate was selected for VP, even if the male candidate had a wife, five children and a special needs child. The question wouldn’t even come up if the male candidate’s wife worked full time and employed a slew of household help to take care of the kids.
It’s stoopid to suggest that Palin’s acceptance of McCain’s offer to VP indicates a lack of judgment because she should be at home taking care of her children.
Sojourner
I thought you promised not to be an asshole this afternoon?
LiberalTarian
What exactly did the wink at the end of my post mean to you? It wasn’t exactly subtle.
Winks generally indicate kidding. Don’t get all holey moley on me because you were too busy popping a vein in your forehead to see it–especially since you’ve been singing the praises of being an asshole today and telling others to get thicker skin. And, re writing better? “Do as I say not as I do,” eh?
Just Some Fuckhead
Agh, that was eerie.
The Moar You Know
Oh dear Christ, a Republican said bad things about some bloggers!
Clutch those fucking pearls any harder, John, they’re gonna turn into diamonds.
w vincentz
I promise that I will never again say anything about a certain knocked-up teenaged daughter named after one of the best fuckin’ NASCAR tracks in the country.
Can I at least investigate the (alleged) DWI of someone named Todd (husband of________ and father of soon-to-be-wedded via formal (white shotgun) ceremony, __________?
Martin
I think the media should do a little balancing act here and report on how many ‘Obama muslim’ emails have been sent around the world since he announced vs how many ‘Palin baby’ blog posts have been published.
When the blog posts get within an order of magnitude of the ‘Obama muslim’ emails, then the GOP can complain about what is on and off limits.
In the meantime, let’s ponder what the freeper/redstate/Focus on the Family/GOP communities would have done had this been Obama’s teenage daughter pregnant out of wedlock. Sorry, but this is a valid topic because both parties have been making it a valid topic since Reagan and Buchanan and the old white guys decided that teen pregnancy was indicative of an erosion of moral values and not an erosion of social support. We’ve been told that teens now are more likely to get pregnant because they don’t pray enough and because welfare exists.
So, since we’ve fucked up this topic for almost 30 years now, what better opportunity is there to actually tackle it head-on? Because some teenager actually is pregnant? Well guess what, there always have been and they’ve been treated like pariahs for 30 years now. If you want to see conservatives actually give a fuck about this, there’s gonna have to be a face on the problem that is one of theirs, because for the last 30 years the GOP argued that only kids that looked like Barack and Michelle got knocked up.
Here we have a kid that I think we can assume prayed enough and doesn’t need welfare, so what’s going on now? Why is her decision so morally acceptable that it’s beyond discussion but an anonymous black teenagers situation is worth centering entire presidential campaign platforms around? And how can the nation tolerate any policy on sex ed or access to reproductive services from McCain/Palin given a situation that is clearly what every other parent in the nation would deem to be a failure within their own family? They have failed within their own population of fewer than 10 people yet feel that they have a right to set policy for 300 million. I think that’s a valid discussion to have and I don’t see how a better opportunity to have it could possibly exist. And the whole thing can happen without mentioning Bristol Palin once.
Koz
Absolutely you can. There will plenty of people voting for McCain to vote against Obama. But keep this up and there will others voting for McCain to vote against you (and your like).
Frankly I think McCain’s going to win anyway, but it’s nice at least to hope that you’ll turn the tide for him.
Darkrose
I think Obama played it perfectly. And I think that the left blogosphere should follow his lead. Don’t go after Bristol Palin. We don’t need to. The issue isn’t Palin–it’s McCain, and his astounding lack of judgement in choosing someone to be his VP that he clearly hadn’t vetted.
SGEW
ThymeZone will turn the tide for McCain?!?
Wow, TZ. Your powers are beyond my understanding.
w vincentz
OH! Labor Day! (double entendre intended)
How’s about forgetting all the cares and saddle your buns up aside the campfire for a sing along? OK?
Everybody, join right in ifin ya ‘member the words…
Great hit by Jeannie C Riley…
“Harper’s Valley PTA”
Let me tell ya’ll a story bout a…
LiberalTarian
I dunno. Somebody should be home with their kids, don’t you think? Even Rick Santorum, with his herd of children, had at least one parent at home with his kids. The Palins have said they need to be a two-income family. Who takes care of the kids when both mom and dad are gone all the time?
Hey, I’m all for people farming out their kids if that is what they want to do. But is it good parenting for mom and dad to work 100 hours a week?
You know, this is actually a good thing in terms of policy discussion. It seems that the Palins have the resources, and the family ability (according to an article I read, Bristol is taking care of the baby, although apparently she left high scool), to have good child care. One of the first things GW Bush cut when he got into office was funding for day care assistance that had been put into place to help mothers get off welfare and get work. If you have a double-income family, decent childcare is a tremendous concern. Who doesn’t want a Waldorf or Montessori day care? Who wants to leave their kids at the lady’s house down the block who only asks for $300 a month but is unlicensed, has no insurance, feeds the kids mac ‘n cheese for every meal and lets the kids run wild all day?
And what about the subset of the population whose husbands or wives are in Iraq/Afghanistan? If the mother works and there is no family nearby, who is looking after the kids?
If Ms. Palin running for VP causes these concerns to be seriously addressed, I am all for it.
On the other hand, Iris Dement did a pretty good job with the topic:
PC
Oh lawdy, I’m feelin’ faint! Can someone get me a mint julep and a cold cloth?
Krista
And that would be taking the debate to a new point of silliness. It’s one thing to think (as I do) that by spreading speculative bullshit about Palin’s kids, we are only giving Obama a headache to deal with. It’s quite another to think that the speculative bullshit will be the deciding factor in the election.
w vincentz
Well, well, well.
If’in she’s elected, she’ll have lots of information comin’ her way, just as the current VP has.
Access to FBI, CIA and all the others.
Think about what can be done with it when she goes after Planned Parenthood and their advocacy for the “pill”.
The information might enlighten her.
Mom: Did you use the pill I gave you?
Daughter: yes.
Mom: I didn’t tell you, but it was an aspirin.
Daughter: Huh? No wonder I don’t have a headache!
Mom: My mistake, honey. I didn’t tell ya how to use it.
Daughter: How Mommy?
Mom: You need to clutch it tightly between your knees.
Daughter: Too late, Mommy.
jibeaux
They’re shaping up to be the Spears family + moose, and I for one am enjoying the schadenfraude, personally. Since Huckenfraude ran its course, maybe Palinfraude can set in.
Charlie
What do you think the rabid right’s reaction would have been if Chelsea had been pregnant? Do you think Hannity, Limbaugh et al would have said it was a personal, family matter and off limits? I don’t think so.
ray
I want to ask Sarah Palin (R-Wasilla/cops) when is this shotgun wedding? She’s 5 months already.Do they want her waddeling down the aisle? Also,if her water breaks early will they fly back to AK instead of going to the nearest hospital?
gopher2b
New GOP platform – It’s not enough to just say you are pro-life. Now, you have to prove it by (1) carrying a kid with Downs to term, and/or (2) have a pregnant teenage daughter carry her baby to term.
Just Some Fuckhead
That was brilliant, Martin. And a little moving.
Just Some Fuckhead
I’m pretty sure John’s been shrieking otherwise.
oh really
As a general principle I agree with John Cole that families should be off limits. I thought the Sarah Palin “grandmother scandal” was a loser for Democrats and if it turned out that Palin was the mother of the child, then all those who went after it would look silly and worse, tawdry.
However, something bothers me about the Bristol pregnancy as an issue. I don’t care if one of Sarah Palin’s kids has premarital sex and gets pregnant. I don’t care if she gets an abortion, has the baby and gets married, or has the baby and gives it up for adoption.
But I do care that Sarah Palin is against legitimate sex education, thinks abstinence-only sex “education” is the way to go, and hopes to take all matters of “choice” out of the hands of every other American female in the future. I do care that Sarah Palin and John McCain want to make US law conform to the religious beliefs of people who, for the most part, I see as ignorant fools. Since Bristol’s pregnancy is tied to all of this, the question arises: Does her pregnancy inoculate Palin/McCain from these issues, because to talk/write about them is to go “there?”
If an issue is legitimate for the MSM to investigate and report — I’m speaking here in an ideal sense, not whether or not they will actually report on something — then it’s legitimate for Democrats to discuss that issue. The better the MSM do their jobs, the less the Democrats have to do.
The problem is, of course, that the MSM seldom do their jobs well at all. However it seems to me that the idea, often repeated in comments at Balloon Juice, that the Democrats can only beat Republicans by being willing to adopt the tactics of Republicans is a sure loser for Democrats.
A political campaign in this country is a game. Currently, the rules of the game are clearly set to favor Republicans. The MSM, filling in as officials, are pretty much in the tank for Republicans. Observing the MSM, one might almost think they had huge bets down in Vegas on the GOP based on the way they cover the two parties. The same media that follow some stories like they were the National Enquirer won’t hesitate to turn around and nail Barack Obama for offensive comments written on blogs like BJ.
So, the Democrats are at a real disadvantage and have to walk a fine line between capitulation and being accused by the media of doing things that the GOP does all the time with virtual impunity.
Personally, I don’t think the Democrats can beat the Republicans at their own game. And I think that game is usually a winner for the GOP. I think this year Obama has to figure out a way to walk that line, try to hold McCain, et al. accountable, raise all the legitimate issues without sliding into the gutter, and in the end hope that enough American voters can see through the Republicans’ incompetence and hypocrisy to eke out a win.
The media are unlikely to help — they’re simply too irresponsible. They don’t do journalism anymore (for the most part). Their gig is infotainment. The drama of an historic nomination in Denver pales compared with the Party of Bush, now led by a saint, sacrificing its convention for the good of the American people.
In this context, how does one ignore or discuss McCain/Palin and issues concerning pregnancy and sex education?
Xenos
Shrieking?
John keeps raising the subject by asking us not to talk about it, and then does not do anything sensible like closing the comments for the post where he tells us to stop talking about it. And then there are 300 comments on why we should or should not talk about what we have been forbidding to talk about, with all manner of snark and trollery for good measure.
I am sure that at times like this John is immensely amused by his poking the anthill and watching us all scurry around in entirely predictable ways. This could very well be part of his professional research.
wasabi gasp
Off limits, shmoff limits. This is big ol’ chewy piece of fat. No keyboard necessary, this story is a yakker.
TenguPhule
Personally I don’t give a shit who’s the mother of the baby.
Can we get back to tearing Palin a new asshole over her batshit insane beliefs in supporting rapist daddies and creationist fundies?
Just Some Fuckhead
No, what they’re saying is our way ain’t fucking working. Only a fool continues to do the same thing expecting different results. You’re conclusion that we can’t win anyway makes the case for playing by their rules. What have we to lose? We’re going to lose anyway in your scenario.
MeDrewNotYou
Hear hear!
We don’t need to dive into the gutter over this woman. All we have to do is tell the nation, our friends, and our families what Palin is really about, and the woman will hang herself on the rope she made.
Just Some Fuckhead
“Your”, even. That’s a sign of bedtime.
Brachiator
It’s not my business. Nor is it yours.
LiberalTarian
You know, there are plenty of people on the religious right side of the aisle calling “bullshit” on the Palin thing.
It might be enough to keep them home … but, it really does depend on their sincerity. I dunno. Is anyone in the religious right sincere anymore?
ThymeZone
I will now snap my fingers. When you awake, you will think you are a canteloupe.
ThymeZone
I thought you gave up being a pearl-clutcher?
oh really
Of course, what Democrats have done in past years hasn’t worked. However, the difference between Al Gore’s defeat and victory was not the adoption of Rove’s techniques. The same goes for Kerry.
Doing the same thing is a sure loser. My conclusion is not that we can’t win anyway (although I don’t see any way to win in the MSM — they’re too far gone). I have no doubt that a Democratic candidate is at a disadvantage to a Republican candidate, but I don’t accept that we have to be Republicans to beat Republicans (in a campaign sense, rather than a policy sense).
The Obama campaign has to show the way. They have to be smarter than past campaigns (whose stupidity is hardly in question). Authors like Drew Westen (The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation) have studied both political campaigns and how the brain functions (Westen is a psychiatrist) and offers suggestions about how Democrats can conduct campaigns that recognize how voters really make decisions (hint: it’s not based on rational issues).
What do we have to lose? If one is willing to destroy something of value to win, then nothing. But our problem isn’t simply that Republicans are incompetent fascists (a problem without a doubt), but also that our entire political discourse is absurd. Unless that is changed, this country is never going to get on the right track again.
Trust me, I understand your anger and frustration. I think I’m probably a bit older than you are, so I’m also, if not angrier, at least more frustrated. Obama has put together some pretty good minds, he knows what the stakes are, he knows how lame the Democrats have been, and I’m pretty sure he really, really wants to win. But it is an uphill battle. Expecting a thoughtful, rational candidate to easily beat John McCain — given what McCain is willing to do and say and who is voting — is crazy. Obama ought to be ahead (on the issues and a rational consideration of the two candidates) by 20 or 30 points at least. Hell, he ought to be ahead by 85 points.
But the American voters that Obama needs to attract are an extraordinarily lame group. Needless to say, he can’t attract them by telling them how lame they are. I can’t tell Obama how to beat McCain — I’m simply not creative enough to walk the fine line between Republican sleaze and Democratic victory. Besides, that’s Obama’s job.
But I certainly don’t want to do anything to make his job any harder. Some of what takes place in blog comments can make it more difficult for him, since the MSM stand ever ready to treat blog comments like they come from the official Obama campaign, ignore issues of major importance, distort issues whose reality is not difficult to discern, and drool every time someone rings the right bell — no matter how stupid what that bell represents is.
Part of the reason I want Obama to win is because I want the nature of politics in this country to change. I don’t believe it will if he adopts Rovian tactics.
And, of course, I may be wrong.
Catsy
There have been some interesting comments over at Obsidian Wings to the effect of the Palin pick demonstrating McCain’s obsession with tactics rather than strategy. Perhaps this is delving too deeply into tea leaves, but then again, what else are blog comments for? So for what it’s worth, my tin foil theory of the week is that McCain, veteran at playing the media that he is, knows that the media will fixate on anything relating to sex. He wasn’t lying when he said he knew about the pregnancy when he picked Palin, he was just stupid enough to think it was something he could use to divert the course of a bad news cycle and make the Obama camp look bad for attacking over it.
It actually makes a bizarre kind of sense when you start from the assumption that McCain is a tactical thinker, not a strategic one.
YellowJournalism
Shorter Hugh Hewitt:
“If it’s good enough for Jamie Lynn Spears…”
Andrew
Well, I could see the comparison, if Obama’s grandma was running for Vice President.
glasnost
Face it, no one is ever left alone. About anything. You can wish for the 1950’s, but its never coming back. If Sarah Palin didn’t want to put her daughter through the scrutiny, she could have said “No, Thank you” when John McCain came knocking.
I don’t want to see anyone harass the daughter, but Sarah Palin herself should absolutely be held accountable for her obvious disinterest in parenting. Anyone think her’s daughters pregnancy gives her daughter a leg up on achievement? Maybe she can live off her parent’s money for the rest of her life, but tens of millions of Americans don’t have that option. This is a public policy living example.
timb
Does this mean Sean Hannity will stop talking about Obama’s half-brother in Kenya and Obama’s responsibility for his “economic” well-being?