It doesn't matter Hilzoy, the National Enquirer is on the job.

Good grief.

Congratulations Governor Palin on soon becoming a grandmother.

Civility is not that hard is it?

This mooseburger-eatin' granny is the gift that just keeps on giving to the Democrats!

Nice to see a political blogger rise above, eh, what is the word? POLITICS!

I am so sick of self-righteous behavior, Hilzoy. You should be better than this. The whole story involves several lies and irresponsible behavior. Plus unsavory consequences of said behavior in way equivalent to the dilemma she and the GOP force poor unwed teenage-minor mothers to bear. If this subject were taboo, then Palin should have already stepped aside. For God's sake, she wants to lead my daughters.

Who says she's pregnant?

Hilzoy, you are one gullible dude!

"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno."
-John McCain

PS -- Abstinence-only works!

PPS -- see this Tapped post: http://tinyurl.com/5qfug2

I feel that Sarah Palin should have turned down the VP spot due to family obligations. Her daughter will be in her third trimester around the election day and will probably be scared and will want her mother around. but, her mother won't be able to be there because she'll be campaigning for her ticket. I feel bad for her daughter and hope everything turns out ok.

Sorry gotta disagree. They obviously knew about the pregnancy before acceptying the ridiculous VP nod, and decided to let their daughter be put in that spotlight. Considering Palin was chosen solely for her religious right family values cred, Bristol's shotgun marriage and pregnancy are very fair game. They are the direct result of this lunatic abstinence only garbage, and should be highlighted as such.

Do you really think Palin didn't talk with her pregnant 17 year old before accepting the VP nod, and get Bristol's ok? That in itself is worth reporters investigating.

Having a 17 year old girl give birth to a child is a parenting failure and not a recommendation for competency. Given how little we know about Palin this is a pretty big deal and not something that can be put aside.

What Joe Scarborough really thinks about Palin Nomination!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTbsbeY5k5k

Let's see how they spin it this week.

Ditto Margaret.

I guess power is the prize that requires the ultimate sacrifices.

Palin is a bad mom cause she is putting her daughter's health at risk.

Look, all this high fallutin' "this is off limits" rhetoric is fine . . . however this doesn't have anything to do with her daughter.

This has to do with Sarah Palin's judgement and who is the mother of her fifth child.

Nothing that has been announced today changes any of that.

As much BS as Senator Obama as been asked to respond to, it is not unreasonable to ask this woman who has been on the national scene for 72 hours to answer a few basic questions.

The pregnant daughter is a decoy. Kind of like being a POW.

Either she can run her household or she can't. Either she had her fifth child or she didn't.
Either she supported the bridge to nowhere or she didn't.

Don't fall for all this "poor kids" crap. It's all political - that's why they started using the Down Syndrome son as a political prop from Day 1.

Sad but true.

Hilzoy, you might as well make this an issue, for whether you or liberals do or not, sooner or later the Repubs are going to accuse the liberals of playing politics with this.

"as has always been the tradition of children of candidates"
I guess this "tradition" only extends to candidates' children and not a sitting president's child as McCain's joke about why Chelsea was so ugly demonstrates:

"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
Because her father is Janet Reno."

Some one should recount that joke to Palin and ask her if she shares McCain's humor. And if she would appreciate the humor of similar jokes made about her children.

Thank you, I totally agree. There is an over abundance of substantive and process issues that can be easily critiqued in this case, personal attacks and especially personal attacks related to her family are spurious, distasteful and unnecessary. Not to mention counter-productive. If you believe that Obama is a trans formative candidate - walk the walk!

Keep talking about the teenage daughter and bad mothers. More than half of the electorate is female. Makes Obama’s affirmative action victimhood look petty.

Agreed that this should not become a political issue for all the reasons you sight -- and because it once agian sucks up air space on non-issues that have no affect on most Americans and the well being of this country. Let's not assist the media in making this election about small things when it should be about big things.

Someone explain this to me. If one of the reasons they released this information was to dispel rumors about Gov. Palin's pregnancy with Trig, is this the best way to accomplish that? Wouldn't it be better to release her medical records or have the doctor who performed the delivery go out and vouch for everything? This just makes an already strange story even more bizarre.

Having raised a couple of teenagers whose behavior frequently appalled me, I am not about to chastise Palin for her daughter's pregnancy.

That said, I strongly suspect Palin will self-destruct as more and more problematic information emerges. It's clear that she was not properly vetted at all. I also think she's going to be a gaffe-generating machine once she's out on the campaign trail.

Blargh is spot on. The main premise being promoted by the Right for why she is qualified to be VP is the fact that she is such a good mother. Well what the hell kind of mother would expose her daughter to this kind of national scrutiny to promote her own political agenda? Its not about whether or not she can take care of her kids as VP, its about what she just did to her kid by accepting this nomination.

I don't feel a need to go after either of them about the pregnancy of Bristol. I do, however, feel that it is necessary to raise the issue of Sarah Palin's extreme view that abstinence only (AO) sex-ed is the only sex-ed that should be taught. Especially since most if not all credible studies have shown that the opposite is true.

If her daughter's pregnancy makes it more difficult to respond to inquiries about her AO stance, so be it.

To think a 17 year old's pregnancy might actually trump a category two hurricane.

Oh the quirks of fate!

Guess the Greedy Ol Party had better get going on their CON-vention after all.

Somehow the ABORTION debate has just gotten a whole lot nastier.

I think it is fair to consider Sarah Palin's comments on this situation, in which she praises "Bristol's decision to have her baby." Her position on the issue is that Bristol should not have a choice. Not even if that baby was a result of a rape, and not even if that baby was Bristol's brother as well as her child.
Her position is that Bristol has decision to make -- because she has no option other than having the child.

Correction to my 2:21 post.
Last line should read:
Her position is that Bristol has NO decision to make -- because she has no option other than having the child.

You've got to be kidding! I wouldn't delve directly into the personal aspects of Palin's daughter so much, although her mother willingly cast her into the spotlight. However, Palin herself is providing a lot of campaign material relative to her conservative, motherly, christian, abstinence-only values, and her reckless labor flight from Texas to Alaska. Add all that to the Maverick's reckless and unvetted selection of Palin, the multiple lies and missteps following Palin's selection and you have a smorgasborg of evidence why the Reps are completely out of touch with their own self-proclaimed Family Values.

Leave the piece of white trash's family out of this. There are plenty of points available to tee off on without dragging out this great example of the effectiveness of abstinence only education.

To my mind, this extends to using her daughter as evidence that abstinence-only education doesn't work: presumably, no one thinks that it works 100% of the time, and that's the only claim to which this one counterexample could possibly be relevant.

Not exactly. Republicans love to point out over and over how condoms might break, contraceptives might fail, while abstinence will ensure that pregnancy doesn't happen. In that case, they really are putting the issue in these absolutist 100% terms. The liberal side of the issue, on the other hand, is that *you can't keep kids from having sex*, so if you really want to keep child pregnancy down, relying solely on abstinence won't cut it. And Palin's child just happens to be a perfect example of that issue.

Plus, doesn't it concern you even a little bit, that Sarah Palin knew this bombshell and 1) apparently didn't tell the McCain team about this, and 2) decided that with this happening, continuing to campaign for Vice President was still a good idea?!

I admired the Clintons who declared Chelsea off limits during his terms.

The Palins, however, are about family values and self-righteousness, and have paraded their tribe around as testament of how well zealotry works.

It's all on Sarah Palin. Not us.

hey Brick Oven Bill,

If Sarah Palin knew her daughter was pregnant before she accepted the VP slot, then that is seriously bad judgment and parenting. Period.

That poor kid is going to be raked, and it doesn't require liberal bloggers to do it. The tabloids have already started to crank.

Oh well, Sarah might get to be VP.

This quickly gets very shrill.

I agree this could just be a set of weird circumstantial coincidences coupled with the colossal bad judgement of a woman who could one day be president, but it's so easy to debunk.

Just release Palin's medical records and it all goes away.

Amen, Sister. Preachin' to the choir. However (you knew that was coming), your commenters and other bloggers raise some important points that need to be addressed (asked of Gov. Palin):
1. When you proudly state that it was your daughter's choice to have the child and get married, were you cognizant of the fact that both you and McCain are actively working to remove that choice - REGARDLESS of how she got pregnant or what will happen when the baby is born, i.e. rape, incest, if she'll die at childbirth, etc.
2. Both you and McCain actively promote abstinence-only education. How's that working out for you and your family? Have you changed your mind about that strategy given the results?
3. Given that your daughter is 5 months pregnant, did she decide to get married because of her current status, your current status as VP nominee, because she actually loves the father, or all of the above?
4. Given that your spokesperson was unaware of your daughter's pregnancy as of last weekend, did McCain know about it before choosing you (TPM Election Central)?
5. Given the fact that you lied about your stand on the Bridge to Nowhere (supported it when running for Governor and kept earmarked funds) in your first statement as VP nominee, why should we believe what you have to say now?

Thank you Governor Palin, and I genuinely wish to convey my best wishes for your daughter and the safe arrival of your grandchild.

Good post, Hilzoy! Steve (2:18PM) pretty clearly addresses the political reality of the Palin issue. But, it's just so, so hard to keep Democrats from pulling the trigger of that gun they always have aimed at their feet.

I completely agree with you Hilzoy.
You are a class act.

I completely agree with you Hilzoy.
You are a class act.

Thank you.

Obama said that we should move beyond making "a big election about small things" and I have read a lot of prevailing wisdom that if Dems make the election about reality and the issues we win. If we get sidetracked into these type of petty things, we not only look small but we risk firing up the base.

I understand the frustration at the hypocrisy of the Republicans and I can see how satisfying it would be to go on the attach, but playing at their level is NOT the way to win. Playing by the same old rules is not the way to get the change that we separately need in politics.

I agree that this is a line that we do not need to cross. While I don't agree with Palin's parenting choices, I also do not truly know anything more than what I have read in the media. And as we know, media articles rarely get give you the full picture. I certainly would not want anyone making judgments on my personal family decisions, especially if the only info they got was in the press.

Focus in the Issues=Obama wins
Forcus on the Moral Debate/Go at Republicans Tit for Tat= who knows?

Without attacking the daughter or criticizing her for being pregnant out of wedlock ourselves, I think the issue about Palin's behavior on the day Trig was born still needs to be cleared up. This is easy to do. Have the doctor hold a press conference and swear that the baby was delivered to Sarah. Release the medical records showing pre-natal visits going back 8 months (including insurance records that these were paid for at the time). This is easy to disprove. So why don't they do it?

TPM has a good run-down on the salient issues.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/08/water-breakgate-8312008-new-an.php

Finally, I would like to make sure that there's a thorough Lex-Nex search to see what every major Republican commentator had to say about Hollywood values when Jamie Lynn Spears was pregnant and make sure it was the same as what they're saying now. Where's Tim Russert when you need him?

Thank you for saying this, Hilzoy. This has all made me sick at my stomach, and ashamed of the people who's opinions I once eagerly sought.

Maybe it's because I have daughters myself, but any talk of this is just despicable. We're better than that, or at least I once thought so.

I agree that the children should not be an issue, but this again points out the hypocrisy of dishonesty of the Rs. Sarah Palin herself was apparently pregnant with her oldest on her wedding day:
http://www.americablog.com/2008/08/sarah-palin-and-children-conceived-out.html

So she knows this could happen to her kids, yet she doesn't support sex education:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Palin_opposed_sexed.html?showall

While the kids should be off-limits, Palin's non-reality based positions should be.

Oh, and Gov. Palin, in asking us to respect your daughter and her privacy, do you have any comments regarding the insults McCain has hurled at Clinton's daughter and Bush's insults of McCain's daughter? In other words, are you asking us to do what they didn't do?

If so, then the answer is 'yes'. Why? Because we're Democrats.

(Was that sanctimonious enough?)

I think it's creepy that the girl is getting married. 17 years old?! How much pressure was put on her to do this in order to salvage some sort of respectability for the ultra-right-wing evangelical Christian wing? You know, Palin's own peeps.

No 17 year old is ready for a meaningful lifelong marriage, let alone one that begins immediately with a baby.

This girl is being used by *many* different people - including those closest to her and her mother's political campaign.

Nice post Hilzoy.

It may be morally degenerate for me to suggest this, but at the very least your overt decency provides some blowback against the "left wing blogger" meme the right is currently pushing.

One more thing:

Hoyt Pollard's question at 2:17 is rather intriguing. No, I am not officially joining the bigfoot baby hunt too. But those are rather tantalizing tracks Hoyt points out...

I see mixed reviews above, but I agree with those who think you're wrong. This shows, at best, massive inattention as a parent, lack of involvement in her daughter's life, and lack of an honest relationship with her daughter. I would agree with you, except that the Republicans have, as usual with their issues-free "character"-oriented politics, made a great deal of her life story as a committed working mom. She acquiesced in that. So, no sale, and whether or not she's a committed and good mother is now on the table as an issue.

What this says about abstinence-only sex education is anecdotal but relevant icing on the cake. The people who promote this idea have terrible values and that needs to be part of our discussion.

Finally, I feel sorry for her daughter, who is being forced into marriage at the age of 17. That's child abuse as far as I'm concerned.

See? I'm so upset I misspelled "whose". Apologies to the editors out there.

Argh. Typing to fast. That should be "attack" not "attach" and "desperately" not "separately".

I completely agree with you on the personal issues. As a public issue it's just more to reflect on the flat-out lousy decision-making McCain and Palin have demonstrated and I think that's highly material.

I completely agree with you on the personal issues. As a public issue it's just more to reflect on the flat-out lousy decision-making McCain and Palin have demonstrated and I think that's highly material.

We have to talk about not talking about it. So let's not talk about it.

Comment #38

That's Just What I Said

This isn't about Bristol.

This is about John McCain and Sarah Palin.

Let's take at face value what everyone is saying, McCain knew, Sarah Palin knew.

How on earth do you accept the VP nomination knowing that in this political climate your daughters personal life is going to be the fodder for tabloids? How is it moral to do that to your child? I have 3 girls, I would NEVER do that to them.

I don't think this is small issue material, this is actually big issue material considering Palin could be in a position to be CinC.

I suppose by claiming the daughter is 5-months pregnant, they are trying to dispell the rumor of Trig being Palin's grandson, born in April (not enough time to get pregnant again). But there were better ways to prove this.

Nonetheless, the daughter's pregnancy would have come out pretty quickly, so now Palin can claim she didn't try to hide it. Just the same, this is yet another complication the Maverick's team has to work overtime on. Along with so many other Palin related gaffes.

Excellent post.

Leave the children of the presidential candidates alone and stay focused on the issues please.

Excellent post.

Leave the children of the presidential candidates alone and stay focused on the issues please.

I think this provides a great opportunity to *inform* people about the value of comprehensive sex-ed and birth-control, and the various choices women should have in reproductive matters.

It's also a great time to bring up the anti-sex-ed, anti-birth control, anti-choice policies of the GOP.

There's enough reasonable doubt as to whether the senior Palin was even pregnant (her water broke in Houston, she gave a half-hour speech, then took an eight-hour plane to Anchorage where she caught another plane to Wasilla and gave birth there -- reckless endangerment of her own fetus by any measure) that the potential of the junior Palin's pregnancy announcement to be a continuation of the cover-up must be considered.

Sorry, but in this country we have a responsibility as citizens to hold our elected officials to a level of honesty and integrity, even if they're heterosexuals who can't keep it zipped if their lives depended on it. (Edwards, anyone?)

"But ask yourself how you felt when Republicans scored points using Chelsea Clinton, who didn't ask to be dragged into the spotlight either."

But if Chelsea had been knocked up at age 17 that would have raised a lot of questions about Bill and Hillary's parenting skills. In fact, Republicans never scored any points using Chelsea because Chelsea never gave them any reason to. And says something about Bill and Hillary too.

I have to disagree with you on this one. I personally could care less that Bristol is pregnant but when you make so called "Family Values" a major platform of your campaign, it becomes news and needs to be talked about. This is just another example of John McBush's poor judgement. This pick was a gift to the religious right, nothing less and nothing more. That McCain would put those people ahead of the country speaks volumes. This pregnancy is just another example of Republicans preaching one thing while doing the other. It's fair game.

I agree, but with a quibble. It's not a matter that republicans might use a similar situation for their political gain - that's a rock solid certainty.

Republicans would already have an ad on air about this were it Biden's kid. You can't stress that enough. But it's also one of the specific things that makes them so abhorrent. We are better than that, or we're just as bad.

Well - to me the main issue is that if McCain knew about this as he says he did; then of course, so did Sarah Palin - she then chose to expose her 17 year old daughter and her out of wedlock pregnancy to the national spotlight - there was no way this could be hidden - so you want to be VP so much that you're willing to put the brightest possible spotlight on your own child? Now - this probably would have made news in Alaska too - but not National Enquirer news headlines as this story is sure to become. I think most parents would have taken a pass at the VP slot given the circumstances - at least for this go around.

Hilzoy just took all the fun out of this delicious bit of schadenfreude--the ^#$@!! is right.

Damn you. ;-)

Robert

Amen, Hil.

And there's no "however." To all the commenters trying to score points about abstinence or "bad parenting" or whatever, go back inside your glass houses and STFU.

"Obama paraded his girls in front of the cameras and one celebrity magazines."

His daughters aren't pregnant, dork.

The point that is missed in the blog is that this whole scandal is ENTIRELY of Palin's making. She did not have to expose her child to the embarrassment of this public scrutiny. She absolutely had to know this was going to come out, and she was too enamored of her public career to care how it would affect her child. I don't give a rat's as* about her daughter's romance. That is the family's business. But what does this say about Sarah Palin's family values? She doesn't have any! Narcissist! Self-centered! Cruel and heartless.

Obviously this candidate values life. Wow! How refreshing to hear the word "ethics" being tossed around. I'm astounded and I assure you millions of others are too. Go Sarah and John! Knock our socks off!

And here I thought that the G in GILF was for Governor...

Right it doesn't matter, except:

Sarah Palin used a statement about her daughter's condition to prove that Trig was her child. Wouldn't medical records be better proof of something like that?

She brought her pregnant daughter on the campaign trail, possibly to show that there was someone who could care for _her_ child. That won't be true in two months, her daughter will have her own family to care for, and her own health.

I haven't seen any proof that her daughter was ever pregnant, or when. No photos I have seen indicate that she was or is pregnant. These photos would be easy to produce. My daughter has hundreds of photos of herself.

There should be dozens of friends of Bristol who can testify that she was never pregnant, or that she is currently pregnant.

But it is just crazy to say that it is a privacy issue at this point.

Sarah Palin is actively pushing the Right Wing talking point that she is pro-life. But both she and her daughter have demonstrated that they are actually pro-choice: they are proud to say they chose to have a baby. They made a choice. But Sarah would like to deprive everyone else from being able to exercise the same moral choice that she and her daughter did. It isn't about privacy, it is about exploitation of your personal story for political gain.

The story isn't the pregnant girl.

The story is that McCain might do really crazy shit without thinking about the consequences to people who can't defend themselves. Like 17 year old girls.

several points:

to those who say this is an issue a question: would you raise the point if it were mr. palin running for office instead of mrs. palin? or are fathers inconsequential?

i know as much about the palin family as the rest of us: not much. but i do know that even even with the best of parents, kids can make poor decisions. what this says about sarah palin as a mom, a person or a candidate is absolutely nothing.

as it says in the new testament: he who is without sin cast the first stone. or if you prefer judge not so that you may not be judged. this could happen to any of us.

as far as the effectiveness of abstinence based sex education, this speaks volumes without the need to pile on.

i became a deomocrat because i didn't want to be a republican. if the shoe were on the other foot i'm sure the party of rove would take full advantage of it. doesn't mean we should adopt rovian tactics.

there's plenty of legitimate ammunition with which to attack palin/mccain, plenty of reasons argue that obama/biden is the far better ticket without having to stoop to this.

I agree that the daughter should be off-limits, but what the hell does this show about Palin's judgment? She accepts the vice-presidential nomination knowing her 17-year-old daughter is five months pregnant, putting the kid (soon to be both kids) in the media spotlight? That is awful judgment. My guess is that Palin will be off the ticket within two weeks.

Afraid I can't go with you on this. She should be allowed to use the Down's syndrome kid as an exhibit of her saintliness, but we can't use the daughter's pregnancy as an example of the idiocy of her positions? I agree it should be done with finessee - i.e., we are glad her daughter was given a choice, and wish here well with her decision, but we must note that Ms. Palin and Mr. McCain do not support the idea that other women faced with crisis pregnancies should have a choice." I don't see a problem with bringing this up every time the abortion issue is raised.

I have a feeling this is going to be moot, anyway, I doubt she is going to be on the ticket come November, I think there is a good chance she will not even be nominated. I am beginning to buy the idea that this was a Rovian plot to get Tom Ridge on the ticket to carry PA - Palin was supposed to get them past the convention, then withdraw because of the needs of the baby, and Ridge could be appointed without the floor fight at the convention. I don't think she was supposed to implode before the convention, though.

Buffalonian, @14:30

If the infant (Trig?) really is the daughter's, not Sarah's, then my script for this particular soap opera says that the girl will have a "miscarriage" before she begins to show much. Ie, the fake pregnancy will have played its role and will be discarded

I'm also guessing that Palin will call this off.

That will really rally the base.

But they are 32% of the population, at most, so why do we give a crap?

Let's not assist the media in making this election about small things when it should be about big things.

For my money, Amanda wins the thread.

OMG. What a masterpiece.
The party whose only politics is one of personal destruction to hide what they're really up to come up with a spectacular honey pot, and proceeds to impugn the character of those who point out the hypocrisy. Ignore it, they win. Mention it -- in any way shape or form, who is fooled by the "its the mother" argument? -- they win.

Speaking of using the child, the next step is obviously a public repentance and turning away from sinfulness pageant. A complete distraction by small things. Of course calling it a pageant can only serve to rile up the base. Is that the point?

OMG. Perhaps the point is just to disgust everyone so much they just stay home.

Can we vote them all off the island?

Thank you. I applaud your approach to this subject. I'm a liberal who believes that, if someone's personal choices (i.e., marriage, reproduction) do not harm another living, breathing human being, they're none of our business. I think a lot of liberals profess this belief. So, let's practice it by admitting that Bristol Palin's pregnancy is politically irrelevant. True, it suggests that McCain's vetting process was nonexistent, but there are plenty of other politically salient points to prove that (Troopergate, for example). Let's leave the young woman alone to figure out her own life and focus on what really matters, namely the economy, national security, and the idea that ordinary people should have more of a say in their government.

to those who say this is an issue a question: would you raise the point if it were mr. palin running for office instead of mrs. palin? or are fathers inconsequential?

If Mr. Palin were a strong pro-life, pro-abstinence supporter whose daughter got pregnant out of wedlock, you bet your sweet bippy I'd be asking him if he thinks abstinence-only education is the best way to educate our children about sex and if he thinks that all pregnant teenagers should get married. You'd better believe I'd be asking him why he thinks his daughter shouldn't have a choice about what she decides to do about an unexpected pregnancy.

This is the extent to which I disagree with Hilzoy -- I see no reason why questions about Palin's pro-life and pro-abstinence beliefs should be off the table because her daughter is pregnant. I was questioning them before this was revealed, and I see no reason why I should not be allowed to continue asking those questions. As I said elsewhere, it's like telling me I can't talk about gun safety anymore because Dick Cheney accidentally shot his friend in the face.

The fact that an accident happened doesn't mean I can't ask questions about the public policies that Palin endorses as the best ones for all Americans, not just her own family. There's no reason why I can't ask why she talks about the "choice" her daughter made when she's on record opposing the right of other American women to have a choice in the first place.

"...her daughter, for instance -- [wound] up there through no fault of their own."

Really? Is that how Repubs would look at it if one of Obama's daughters was in the same kind of pickle (with ice cream)?

Excellent post, Hilzoy; agreed 100%.

I'm a liberal who believes that, if someone's personal choices (i.e., marriage, reproduction) do not harm another living, breathing human being, they're none of our business.

Sarah Palin does not. She thinks that abortion should be illegal in EVERY circumstance except the life of the mother. If you're raped or molested by a family member, too bad -- you bring that baby to term unless your own life is in imminent danger.

Palin can't declare that the government has an interest in my womb so strong that it's allowed to dictate my health care and then declare that her daughter's womb is off-limits to scrutiny because it's a private matter. Either every American woman's womb is public property that can be regulated by the government, or it's her private property to do with as she wishes -- and yes, that includes getting married and having a baby at 17.

Palin needs to answer which she believes: should her daughter have had the choice to keep that baby or not? The fact that she made her own choice is great, but Palin's stated position is that she should NOT have been allowed to have that choice in the first place, so touting that her daughter made her own choice -- a choice Palin would deny to every other American woman -- is hypocritical in the extreme.

Anyone who would let their 17 year old into a shotgun marriage is a pretty piss poor mother.

Wow,an Alaska teenager is preggers! Gives new meaning to the word Ididarod, by golly.

This is total bullshit. Palin wants to go to the White House and pay "Christian" groups hundreds of millions to promote "abstinence". But her 17-year old daughter is about to get married and have a child!

The public deserves to know- does she think this is a feature or a bug? If "abstinence" didn't work in her own family, why does she think that was? If it was because she was too busy being governor, what exactly does that mean for the rest of the women in America? Should they give up careers to safeguard their "abstinence only" daughters on a 24-7 basis, or should they just plan for the inevitable pregnancy?

Does she think children should get married before they leave high school? Most people who have a choice in the matter don't seem to think that. It doesn't seem to make much sense.

And this is just about the only issue where she even seems to know what she thinks!

Seems Hilzoy is feeling all high-minded right now, but to me it just sounds stupid.

If somebody believes in "abstinence" and it worked for them, that's one thing. If they believe in rewarding teen mothers with lavish educations, child support, and daycare, that's, well, maybe not the best solution, but almost acceptable.

To reward Palin's bad behavior though, is just dumb. I've got other things to worry about than her kids. If she wants to spare them the spotlight, she should get out of the race, considering that her 'Plan A' has already failed.

Actions have consequences. Or does that only hold true for Democrats?

There's enough reasonable doubt as to whether the senior Palin was even pregnant (her water broke in Houston, she gave a half-hour speech, then took an eight-hour plane to Anchorage where she caught another plane to Wasilla and gave birth there [...] -- Josh O, @14:42

10hrs (give or take) between her water broke and she gave birth? On the first child, maybe. On the *fifth*? And a month ahead of schedule? Not very likely, unless it was breach. But, if it had been in breach position, she wouldn't have been so totally unconcerned as to keep on with speechifying instead of checking into the nearest hospital, pronto. Unless, of course, she belongs to the "God gives and God takes away and it's not for us to meddle with His plans" school of thought...

Actually, I'm very interested to see how the GOP deals with Palin's daughter's pregnancy.

To be pregnant at 17 would confirm a horrible stereotype that the monied classes hold against blue-colar folks--that you're Poor White Trash. Good heavens, the GOP elite banged this drum for all it was worth with Bill Clinton, particularly post-Monica.

I suspect the monied folks at the GOP will start to sit on their hands during this election or switch their registrations to independent.

I would strongly urge the Dems to leave this one alone. But for the GOP, it looks like they have a "Tom Eagleton" situation on their hands. ANd it affects both their Prez and Veep picks. I think the inter-party knife fight starts tonight.....

bp now low enough to find the question:

Is this nonsense
1. all they've got, the "October surprise",
2. a good filler to keep attention until they spring (is the seasonally appropriate term "let fall"?) the October surprise or
3. an improvisation to make sure no one notices how bad the GOP con would look in comparison that will be forgotten next week?

I've been swinging back and forth on this, but then I remembered something:

We did not make Sarah Palin's family an issue.

Sarah Palin did.

She described herself as a 'hockey mom,' -- and made it a key reason for supporting her -- she paraded her family before the cameras, and stressed her daughter's -- giving her the benefit of the doubt -- handicap. (And the question as to whether a 4 month old baby should be dragged to a political event is a matter of judgment that should be looked at.) She has made her 'pro forced pregnancy' position an issue throughout her career.

Again, as several people have pointed out, the current pregnancy had to have been known to her and (five months + 2 months before the election) would have been visible to everybody. Either McCain knew, or she lied to him (an issue that hits two ways) or she's lying now.

(But 'keep the baby' doesn't have to mean 'rather than abort it,' it can mean 'rather than place it up for adoption.')

Sorry, Hillzoy, I wanted to agree with you, and started out there, but the more I think about it, the more I think it raises valid questions -- which should be asked, not which should serve as a vehicle for attacks.

I want these people to be destroyed by any means possible. They condone fraud, deny choice, and are implicated in the deaths of over 1 million Iraqis. They're criminal scum. I'll start respecting the privacy of the Palin family when they start respecting the privacy and rights of Americans/Iraqis.

I agree Hilzoy.

After all the lies, false rumors and character assasinations about Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama in the past year, this is really not the level of discussion Democrats should be pursuing.

Leave it to those who do it best, then giggle about it afterward in the dark, damp places they inhabit

Sorry, Hilzoy. Your kind of knee-jerk political correctness is one major reason why the country's in such dire straights.

I agree Hilzoy.

After all the lies, false rumors and character assasinations about Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama in the past year, this is really not the level of discussion Democrats should be pursuing.

Leave it to those who do it best, then giggle about it afterward in the dark, damp places they inhabit

Puh leeeeeze!

Not fighting back with the dirty tricks the GOP uses is why the Dems LOSE all the time.

I just think it's cruel that she's choosing to run as VP when she must have known it would have thrust this personal situation into the media limelight.

In a perfect world, that it is a "personal situation" would have kept it off limits. But that's not how this media world works, and as someone who knew several people who got pregnant in high school and college, I can just say that getting through life in your own small community of friends and acquaintances when something like this happens is terribly stressful and upsetting for the girl at the center of it. I can't imagine how awful it would be to have it all over the airwaves, all over the world.

And for John McCain.

The Republicans always make an issue of things like this.

The Republicans always win. Are we done here?

If McCain even intimates that these left wing bloggers are indicative of Obama's character, Obama should have a full quiver of RW verbal atrocities with which to smear McCain.

Sleaze must be used judiciously. If in the last 10 days of a close election, indications were that virtually any manner of verbal or photographic deceit would ensure victory, I would use it. Silly me; I thought this election was extremely critical.

Nobility in defeat would never count for less than this year. Too many democrats think politics is like Sunday afternoon croquet.

Mnemosyne: "This is the extent to which I disagree with Hilzoy -- I see no reason why questions about Palin's pro-life and pro-abstinence beliefs should be off the table because her daughter is pregnant."

Actually, I agree that Sarah Palin's views are fair game. Likewise, the degree to which she sticks to them when it's her daughter, not someone else's.

I just don't think her daughter is fair game.

This story is important because Right Wingers like Palin are always crowing about how THEY know what's best for all the rest of us. For example, they would outlaw abortion and not provide sex education because "they know this is the 'right' thing to do."

Well, here's an example of how well their "great judgment" -- that they want to inflict on the rest of us -- turned out.

With all due respect, I disagree. The Republican/Conservative plank of "Family Values" and their insistence that they know better and have the right to legislate the personal and most intimate parts of American's lives makes Bristol Palin's out-of-wedlock pregnancy a fair subject for discussion. I have not forgotten Terry Schiavo. If Sarah Palin wants me to respect her and her family's privacy she should stop trying to force her private personal views on me and my family.

Finally, this entire bizarre pregnancy issue with 44 and 17 year olds and mystery pregnancies stinks.

Look, McCain's campaign is going to self-destruct. Meanwhile, think of what this kid Bristol must be going through! She's only 17.

Still, a 17-year olds is of the age of reason. Her mother shouldn't be held accountable for Bristol's actions, and Bristol's choices are her own business.

Palin should be confronted about her positions on women's issues without reference to her children.

I must be on a different planet than some of you. She's intentionally using her daughter to deflect attention from herself. That's not an admirable quality. Of course Bristol's privacy should be respected, but it's not an automatic out for her mom.

Robert Stacy McCain at American Spectator respectfully disagrees:

'Responsibilities of Adulthood' - Monday, September 01, 2008 @ 1:34:58 PM Since the McCain campaign has released a statement declaring that 17-year-old Bristol Palin now faces "the responsibilities of adulthood," might I be so bold as to suggest that they arrange a press conference where Bristol can attempt to address the horrible embarrassment she's caused her parents?

Excuse my paternal (and political) indignation but I am in no mood for pleas that the media respect anyone's privacy at this point. I don't think it an exaggeration to say that this girl (and her boyfriend) have caused a crisis of global significance, and if her parents are serious about "the responsibilities of adulthood," Bristol ought to face the consequences, including about 45 minutes in front of the klieg lights while reporters shout stupid questions.

It's not Bristol's fault her mother was picked as the GOP running mate, but she certainly should have understood how her personal behavior would reflect on her family.

This is an insult to Republicans. Republicans, real Republicans rather than what the Left simply imagines Republicans to be (to wit: evil), wouldn't use someone else's children this way. Period.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Man, you're a great kidder. Either that, or you think we all have amnesia about 1992-2008 and don't remember all of the scurrilous attacks you made on every Democratic target in sight.

Hell, you think we can't even remember two months back when you were insisting that Barack Obama wasn't born in Hawaii and had been using a fake birth certificate his whole life.

If by not leaving this alone, people think that their arguments are going to change the minds of low-information voters on the right, I think it will do more harm than good. Leave it to the Star and Enquirer to carry the message placing it in front off every shopper going through the check-out line at the grocery store.

Obama agrees. From http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/obama_family_off_limits.php

BO: I have heard some of the news on this and so let me be as clear as possible. I have said before and I will repeat again, I think people's families are off limits, and people's children are especially off limits. This shouldn't be part of our politics, it has no relevance to governor Palin's performance as a governor or her potential performance as a vice president. And so I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories. You know my mother had me when she was 18. And how family deals with issues and teenage children that shouldn't be the topic of our politics and I hope that anybody who is supporting me understands that is off limits.

This question was asked over at Pandagon. Any answer?
"Did the Republicans really need to put a teenage girl on blast because of anonymous Internet comments made over a holiday weekend?"

Who is Robert Stacy McCain? What an asshole.

This reminds me of the episode of Law and Order C.I. where the stepmother got pregnant by her stepson, then prematurely induced birth to support a time line that made sense to her husband. The resulting premature child had developmental issues. The positioning and political maneuvering of Palin makes me wonder what's going on?

In a 2006 Eagle Forum questionnaire, Palin indicated that she supported funding abstinence-until-marriage education programs instead of teaching sex-education programs.

"Explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support," Palin wrote in the conservative group’s questionnaire.

How's that working out for ya Huh Sara?

Real republicans want to regulate personal behavior but would not score political points off candidates children??? The hypocrisy of family values candidates like Vitter or Gingrich or Foley etc (so many to choose from)whose personal behavior is completely opposite of those same values is astonishing. For reality's sake you should shorten that phrase from "real republicans" to just you and a couple people you know. I refer you to Greenwald's book "Great American Hypocrites" to see why this is so.

I agree, Hilzoy. All I want to hear in public from my fellow liberal Democrats is, "Our best wishes go out to the Palin family at this difficult time, and we hope that the press will respect their privacy."

To dwell on any of this would be both indecent and impolitic.

What's at issue is McCain, McCain, McCain. His judgment, his priorities, his temperament, his grasp of the facts, his positions on the issues. All of these are losers for him. We can't let this election be about abstinence, or lapel pins, or any other sideshow. For once please god let's have an election about what direction to take this country and who can best lead us in that direction. That's an argument I believe my side can win fair and square.

Sarah Palin thought abstinence only referred to civics classes... (from questionnaire of Gov's race 2006)
"...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."

Mnemosyne, do I really need to explain the difference between a Candidate and a Candidate's minor children?

Given that you're trying to pretend that only a few people made Chelsea Clinton jokes and that they were minor Republican figures and not, say, John McCain and Rush Limbaugh on national TV, I thought it was worth pointing out that you guys not only support attacks on Democrats' minor children, you also support patently false ones. Unless Republicans have finally given up on the "OMG he's a SECRET MUSLIM!" mass e-mails and I haven't heard about it?

And wasn't it your side who was peering into the windows of private citizens and declaring that their countertops were too nice for their children to be on S-CHIP?

Please don't try to pretend you have any limits just because the rules you set up are starting to backfire on you and be applied to Republicans. You reap what you sow, and you've sown some ugly, ugly crops for the past 20 years.

And this is not a "scurrilous attack", this is beyond the pale. This is the kind of stuff you'd see highlighted on Rense or something...

Pointing out that Palin allowed her daughter to make a choice when she would deny every other woman in America the legal right to make that choice is not a scurrilous attack. It's a fact. Sarah Palin wants abortion to be banned even in cases of rape and incest, and yet she talks about her daughter making a "choice."

It wasn't Democrats who issued a press release to discuss Bristol Palin's pregnancy. It was the McCain campaign. They decided to throw a 17-year-old girl to the wolves right when the brightest spotlight is on the campaign because of their convention.

I think this is all of a piece with how Republicans always operate. You're just shocked to find out they're equally willing to throw Republican minors overboard as they are to attack Democratic minors.

Yes Jasper, and it wouldn't be torture if people didn't call it that. We get it.

And Nixon didn't break the law until he was caught.

Jasper: Dobson loves Palin. Dobson writes book about parenting and has things to say about children and families that aren't consistent with what Palin and her husband are doing/have done as parents. Might be interesting to explore the disconnect between Dobson the psychologist and Dobson the evangelical politician.

Seems like Dobson's got a big hypocrisy problem that might be worth examining. Evangelicals dance for joy that a mother of five with a four-month old with special needs and an absentee husband has chosen to run for VP. What's wrong with this picture?

You're full of shit, Jasper. Gov. Palin and Sen. McCain made a conscious decision to drag Bristol into this. They could have easily said, "We're not going to address ridiculous rumors posted on some anonymous Web site."

I'm not advocating that the Obama campaign have anything to do with this whole pregnancy thing. And I'm glad to see them taking a hands-off approach to it. Discussing this whole thing is *our* job. We're citizens, we're the ones who are affected by these people's actions. We're allowed to scrutinize them and not have to apologize for it. They work for *us*.

So yes, I disagree with Hilzoy's main point. While Bristol herself is certainly off-limits, Sarah is definitely worthy of criticism. You can't be an advocate for government takeover of women's bodies, all the while illustrating precisely why, through your own family's difficulties, such a policy is likely to be disastrous on a large scale.

And it is precisely this kind of pressure, media and internet, that will get exerted on her candidacy and force McCain to make a very hard decision on whether he's going to keep her on (or whether Palin will step down on her own initiative). Reeps don't do the right thing without lots of pressure being brought to bear, and I'd have thought the past 8-14 years would have made that point obvious enough to the handwringers here.

The Republicans opened this door when they hounded Clinton into lying about consensual sex.

They'll get their just due and they'll like it.
As far as the posters who want Dems to be "above" it all, go away. Being "above" it all got us Bush / Cheney in the first place and how did that philosophy work out for John Kerry?

Shovel the crap back at the hypocritical Corporatists as fast as they open their lying mouths.

jvoe:
"The story isn't the pregnant girl. The story is that McCain might do really crazy shit without thinking about the consequences to people who can't defend themselves. Like 17 year old girls."

So true. It's about his judgment, or lack of.

And Palin's too. Think about this: Had she not been a VP contender, none of us here would know about or care about Alaskan politics. Especially some podunk governor. Her daughter would go about having this child quietly and none of us would give a good goddamn.

While I agree the girl should not be skewered, her mother and her mother's *soulmate*, and even her father, and Cindy McCain all bear responsibility. They brought this scene to the lower 48 and to the forefront. It would be non-news otherwise.

Christ. Look what they did to Monica Lewinsky. Did they hesitated then? Hell no.

In McCain's world, anyone's fair game for sacrifice.

While I agree with Hilzoy’s ultimate position on this situation I have to say the following:

• To think that the right-wing would not politicize this if the shoe was on the other foot is extremely naïve.
• It was inevitable that Bristol Palin’s pregnancy would become public knowledge. If the McCain campaign had known about this (which I don’t think they did) they should have upon Gov Palin’s selection released a brief factual statement stating that Bristol Palin is pregnant and this is a private family matter. Instead the campaign chose to politicize this by indicating that it was her daughter’s choice to “keep� the baby and then made a baseless accusation that the Obama campaign of playing politics with a family matter. This was a blatant attempt to shore up support among Gov Palin’s conservative base.
• The McCain campaign has also chosen to politicize baby Trig. Again a factual statement, indicating that her child has Down’s Syndrome and this is a private family matter would have been sufficient. Instead the McCain campaign chose to use this as an example of Gov Palin’s commitment to anti-choice policies. In addition, they are using this to make Gov Palin a sympathetic character……how dare you attack Gov Palin her child has Down’s Syndrome!!!11!!!!
• The McCain campaign is trying to leverage their incompetence to inoculate them pro-choice and pro-sex education political debates.
• The McCain campaign is playing victim politics to the extreme (e.g., POW) and this is just another example of this.
• If and when Gov Palin decides that she needs to quit the campaign, McCain will indicate that it was due to unfair treatment by bloggers, the Obama campaign, and the media. Instead it will be due to the McCain campaign’s incompetence and lack of judgement.

Jasper: Sarah Palin wants to be VP and Dobson says that's a great thing. Here's Dobson in a different context:

QUESTION: Everyone knows that divorce is tough on children. What about parent-child separation that occurs for reasons other than divorce? Is the pain any less intense for kids when a parent has a good reason to be away?

DR. DOBSON: Research confirms that the consequences of any parent-child separation can be severe. In one study of fathers whose jobs required them to be away from their families for long periods of time, the children tended to experience numerous negative reactions, including anger, rejection, depression, low self-esteem and, commonly, a decline in school performance. Those findings have been confirmed in other contexts as well.

Some of those conclusions were presented at a White House conference at which I spoke a few years ago. The other speaker was Dr. Armand Nicholi, professor of psychiatry at Harvard University. That day, Dr. Nicholi explained how family circumstances that make parents inaccessible to their children produce some of the same effects as divorce itself.

Cross-cultural studies make it clear that parents in the United States spend less time with their children than almost any other nation in the world. For decades, millions of fathers have devoted themselves exclusively to their occupations and activities away from home. More recently, mothers have joined the work force in huge numbers, rendering themselves exhausted at night and burdened with domestic duties on weekends. The result: No one is at home to meet the needs of millions of lonely preschoolers and latchkey children.

mudwall: "to those who say this is an issue a question: would you raise the point if it were mr. palin running for office instead of mrs. palin?"

Yes, assuming he held the same views. I don't think most of us are casting stones, btw. We're pointing out the hypocrisy of Palin's positions... her daughter has a choice on keeping the baby apparently, but Palin wants Roe overturned. Palin wants sex ed banned in favor of abstinence ed only, but fails to heed the reality that her 17 yo unmarried daughter didn't remain abstinent and didn't use birth control.

I don't find that train of thought to be casting stones.

You are so duplicitous. Remember that it was the GOP that made family values a touch stone of their party and their campaigns which rallied evangelical support in 2000 and 2004. So, why should their candidates actual families be off limits? Do you think that if Joe Biden's unmarried child was pregnant that there would be a "hands-off the kids" policy coming from the GOP right now?

Dudes. Don't feed the JasperTroll!

"Homocide refers to the taking of a life"

No, it refers to killing someone gay. That's evidently on your mind.

Hey Jasper, Here's something you can count on.

Everyone should take their blinders off, big deal she's going to be a grandmother. Is it so bad her daughter isn't married, no. This baby will be one more person in life to be loved. Stop all the bs and start acting human.

"Homicide. It's a f*ing typo... it's hard responding to all the BS you guys are putting out."

Freudian slip? Only your therapist knows.

What makes you think we're all guys? Is it because anyone with a vagina must be on Palin's side? (That seems to have been the calculation.)

Sarah Palin brought her daughter into the spotlight she could have dispelled the rumors about baby Trig by providing medical records or a birth certificate - the campaign didn't need to bring Bristol's pregnancy into this.

You can criticize Gov. Palin's views on abortion, but those views are irrelevant to her family and her family's actions. Even moreso because there's no actual hypocrisy in their actions.

Again, the fact that McCain and Palin think that the women of the United States should not be given any choice when it comes to unwanted pregnancy is absolutely relevant when they issue a press release talking about how Palin's daughter "chose" her path.

McCain and Palin applaud that Palin's daughter was able to make a choice but neglect to mention that they think that women shouldn't even have a choice to make to begin with.

According to Gov. Palin, any woman who gets pregnant -- even one who was raped or molested by a family member -- should be forced to continue that pregnancy. Palin is saying that she's happy with the "choice" her daughter made while working to remove the possibility of any other woman being allowed to make a free choice at all.

Sorry, but that's Hypocrisy 101: My daughter made a choice, but none of the rest of you should be allowed to do so.

This is waaaay beyond what Freepers, JBS, or *insert-right-wing-boogeyman-here* would do.

BS. I say that based on nearly fifteen years of baseless crap about how the Clintons "killed Vince Foster." There's nothing the right wouldn't say. However, Hilzoy is right and reputable liberal blogs should stay far away from the personal aspects of this story. The policy behind abstinence-only is fair game.

From Hilzoy's original post:

"As far as I'm concerned, it's fair game to consider Sarah Palin's statements about her daughter's decision, and to compare them to her own views about abortion. That's a story about whether or not Sarah Palin sticks to her beliefs when they affect her own family, not about her daughter."

"...we have no idea at all what arrangements she and her husband have made for child care, how their relationship works, and so forth."

"...some people will respond to this post by saying that the Republicans would not hesitate to use Democrats' teenage children to score political points."

"...any argument for going there would have to assume that this would, in fact, be a political winner, and thus that not using it would entail some sort of political sacrifice."

****

Hilzoy's points are rational and reflect sympathy, empathy, good judgment -- including good political judgment -- and principles. She didn't say Palin's political stands should be off limits. How many posters actually read the original post?

Obama's own response was clear and reasonable.

I'm pro-choice, and pro-honesty. To complain about Republican sleaze -- then use it to excuse Democratic sleaze -- is dishonest.

Practically speaking, there's an old saying: "Never get in a farting contest with a skunk." The less we beat this dead moose, the sooner voters will notice which party the stench comes from. Leave them alone, and the Republicans will cut themselves to shreds over Sarah Palin.

If you're going to argue about abortion to anyone who isn't already pro-choice you need to realize that you're missing an entire premise. Pro-life proponents are arguing that abortion is homocide (note: not murder*). Anyone who's arguing that their (implied: chief) aim is a "government takeover of women's bodies" is not examining the entire situation.

Anyone who argues that abortion is "homicide" while never even mentioning the woman who's actually pregnant is not examining the entire situation.

Someone who insists that a crime victim must stay pregnant with her rapist's or molestor's baby because it would be "homicide" to terminate the pregnancy is not examining the entire situation.

Someone who doesn't see that giving the government control over the healthcare of half of the population is setting up a situation where, as in China, the government can dictate who can and cannot continue a pregnancy is not examining the entire situation.

What I do with my uterus -- and what Bristol Palin does with her uterus -- is not the business of the government or the public. It is my business. But when you set up the idea that the government should be involved in what a woman does when she gets pregnant, you open the door to everyone having an opinion about what pregnant teenagers should or should not be allowed to do with their own bodies.

Conservatives have set up a situation where you say that strangers should be allowed to decide what a woman does when she's pregnant, and now you're screaming because strangers are discussing what this particular girl is doing now that she's pregnant. Either it's her private business that strangers have no call to interfere with, or her pregnancy is public business and strangers can approach her as she tries to enter a medical clinic and try to block her from doing what she wants.

Which is is, Jasper? Is Bristol Palin's pregnancy her own business because her body is her own, or is it the business of the public because the government has an interest in preventing her from committing homicide? You can't have it both ways and declare that it's a private matter if she continues the pregnancy but a public matter if she wants to get an abortion.

Sorry. The 6:01 post is mine.

-- alibubba

Cheers Hilzoy

"The Wasilla Hillbillies Go The Washington."

Alaska, the land where failed southern rednecks go since they won't look so stupid in comparison to the natives.

We don't have to say a word. Everyone else is.

I give Governor Bimbo a week fefore she's done to a turn.

I agree with Hilzoy, but with reservations.
Whether Turd Blossom (can't do the trademark thingy) is directly responsible or not, I don't know. I do believe that this whole thing has been designed to remove two topics from the discussion table during the campaign: abstinence-only sex education and abortion.
By having Gov. Palin herself bring her daughter into the spotlight, the Republicans will now attempt to BS everyone into believing that any attempt to discuss either abortion or abstinence-only sex education are attempts to exploit the governor's family for political gain. Which is true, but as it's the Republicans doing the exploiting, it's okay.
However, that should not prevent Democrats from asking Gov. Palin to explain her views on astinence-only sex education and abortion. If those topics are removed from the campaign, the Republicans will be a position to con a large number of "independent" voters in November. And I sort of think that the Republicans know that and that that was the whole purpose of this "National Enquirer" moment.
However, and here is where I do agree with Hilzoy, there is no need for any Democratic candidate to even mention Gov. Palin's daughter. If a reporter actually asks about the Governor's daughter, I would recommend a look of feigned puzzlement. If the reporter persists, then Sen. Obama's comment should be repeated. Until the reporter asks a different question or goes away. There are times when NOT being in the news is good for a politician.

We don't have to say anything. The event speaks for itself. And the National Enquirer will do everything needed to barbecue the Wasilla Hillbillies to a well-done turn.

The Palins: proof of the bankruptcy of Republican Theocracy.

After putting up with these morons for the past 40 years, there's nothing too bad that can happen to any of them.

I give Governor Bimbo a week before she runs home in tears.

The law/public/government may or may not have an interest in whether women who are five months pregnant under this condition can or can not commit homicide (again, you're ignoring premise #1). The law/public/government does not have a specific interest in whether this specific 17 year-old girl on an individual basis does or does not do anything.

So you're arguing that the law/public/government only applies to abstract concepts and not to actual people?

No wonder you guys are so bad at public policy -- you don't understand that the policies you set and the laws you pass affect actual people. Once you set up the premise that strangers are allowed to comment on and interfere with the pregnancies of women they don't know, you set up a situation where specific 17-year-old-girls are affected.

Does it suck that we've reached a point where everyone feels like they should be allowed to have an opinion on a pregnancy that's come to public attention? Of course. But it's no different than when people were discussing Britney Spears' being a bad mother or her sister's teen pregnancy.

And it's certainly not beside the point to mention that, according to Gov. Palin, her daughter should have NO legal choice in the matter, that the path she chose should be the only one open to every woman in America.

The point is not that OMG Palin has a pregnant daughter! As I've said many times, it happens to the best parents and it can't be said to be a reflection on Gov. and Mr. Palin's parenting skills at all.

The point is that Gov. Palin has very specific beliefs that she wants to impose on every woman in America. If she privately believed that abortion is wrong, that's one thing, but she wants to ban abortion as a matter of public policy. She wants to take the choice that her daughter made for herself and decree that it's the only choice that should be allowed in the United States.

Do you see the difference between believing for yourself that abortion is homicide and declaring that your personal belief that abortion is homicide should be imposed on the rest of the population of the United States?

Dobson is a hypocrite and the evangelicals who trumpet "family values" and ignore the obvious damage Palin's absence from her family (Todd isn't a stay-at-home Daddy) will do are equally hypocritical. In the current evangelical ethos, there's no problem sacrificing family on the altar of politics, so long as you are a Republican.

"not all homicide is criminal . . . "

This is blindingly ignorant. Here's a standard definition: Homicide is the deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another. See that word "unlawful"? That means, like, you know, criminal. That means like, um, murder. Please find another word, one that means what you think it means.

Democratic surrogates for Obama, and Obama himself should SHUN this story like it was the plague. However, what will the cable pundits do? I bet they also shun the story. But if Obama had a 17 yr. old daughter who was pregnant out of wedlock, we'd think the cable coverage of Rev. Wright was a cakewalk by comparison!

Democratic surrogates for Obama, and Obama himself should SHUN this story like it was the plague. However, what will the cable pundits do? I bet they also shun the story. But if Obama had a 17 yr. old daughter who was pregnant out of wedlock, we'd think the cable coverage of Rev. Wright was a cakewalk by comparison!

What are the age on consent laws in Alaska?, the baby daddy could be a child molesting statutory rapist.

I assume the bulk of your readers are Liberal Arts majors and shouldn't be held to a high standard of reasoning,but several need to be spanked a bit.
First TC using the term "Gov Bimbo".Would you care to elaborate on that?She doesn't see3m to be stupid or flighty;hasn't had multiple affairs and seems to be a devoted mother.You make yourself and the site look ridiculous.
exlibra.re' the infant trig not being Mrs P alin's.How do you expect to keep a secret when the governor of a state fakes a delivery.Let's see,someone would have to fake prenatal care and a delivery:someone would have to fake a delivery on the sitting governor of a state and a doc would have to falsify a l and d slip and a birth certificate.This is "the Moon Landing Was Faked "reasoning.And you probably vote.And the idiot who claimed having a pregnant 17 yo child is an example of incompetence is both stupid and nasty to an exponential degree.I've delivered mom's far younger than 17 who had wonderful parenting;there's no magic formula.
Indo want to inform you of the Kindly Old Burt Shotton theory from the Boys of Summer.A Ny sportswriter (Dick Young ) claimed the Bk Dodgers "won in spite of,lost because of KOBS".So many of the above want to take any action to denigrate when it is done by someone you consider an enemy.That's not an intelligent or even somewhat mature mode of reasoning.As Tom Watson,Sr was wont to say THINK.

Why do you leave the freedom to choose
only to the women of the religious right
and to their daughters.
They are free to have sex before wedding or not,
and to abort or not.
The rest of us will not get that freedom if they
will have their way.
You give up the most important defensive weapon
against the religious right namely: Pointing
out their hypocrisy (which they don't even hide anymore...).

Irony lives. Hilzoy's post about not talking about the family has 142 comments and counting. Steve Benen (CB? PA? SB? Dawg? :-) made the excellent point that it took this to get the MSM's interest and they're asking all the wrong questions. And now McRovebot is trying to blame Obama. Repurposing Kafka: McCain "awoke one morning from a troubled dream, and found himself changed in his bed to some monstrous kind of vermin."

That's Just What I Said

You said it perfectly, no one should add anything.

Ok. Great argument. Now can we STFU? Spend time on something real

The Other Iraq

"According to the CDC, in 2004, 839,226 unborn American babies lost their lives in abortion (and the number was actually significantly larger, since four states, including California, refused to report the number of abortions performed there). This amounts to an average of at least 2,299 per day. And in the time that it took to spend two days of news cycles covering the testimony of General David Petraeus, the number of American unborn babies killed during that two-day cycle is higher than the number of Americans killed so far in Iraq.

From March 20, 2003 until April 10, 2008 (1,848 days) there have been 4,041 deaths of already-born Americans. This is an average of 2.18 tragic deaths per day in Iraq

As of the last known statistics, 839,226 unborn Americans are aborted in a year. This is an average of 2,299.24 tragic deaths per day on U.S. soil"

http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!F3D4C1BC1D8B0D91!555.entry

Hilzoy:

I didn't read all of the comments, but here is my take on this. There is some classic Rovian misdirection going on. The issue (which I never took seriously until Andrew Sullivan raised it) was whether the infant baby Trig is really hers considering there are pictures and video of her in April and March where she does not appear to be pregnant at all. The touching story of Trig is one of the featured parts of her sales pitch, much like her aw shucks line about winning Miss Congeniality, (see http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/columnists.nsf/debpeterson/story/23D7A0CF8A2E3A61862574B50011DB30?OpenDocument, for an interview stating that the Miss Congeniality story is not true by the real winner of the Miss Congeniality award). Palin could have answered the question by supplying Trig's birth certificate. Instead she busted out her poor daughter, seemingly as a human shield, and then screamed for privacy for Bristol. It reminds of the Air National Guard feint by Bush's people where you could never again raise the question of Bush's service. Oh, and I'm not a troll. But Palin is already a proven liar so forgive me for not being ready to accept her human sacrifice in the form of her daughter.

I'm really concerned for her children. She needs to be home with those poor children and maybe her daughter wouldn't have went out looking for approval.

Also, I noticed the odd names she chose for her children and read once that mothers who are crying for attention usually name their children striking names to get it.

I also would like to add about the issue on abortion....it is a sin and I don't support it being used as birth control, but, the Bible says that God gave man free-will. I don't think that man-made laws should govern whether women want to risk going to hell for killing their babies - that's their choice.

Ironically, look at Casey Anthony. Self-centered mothers are better to get rid of the child in the beginning, rather than force the child to suffer. God has a place for all of those unwanted souls of children, and they will most likely be reborn to better parents.

Well said.

Prenatal testing indicated that Sarah Palin's fifth baby was going to have Downs Syndrome. Her other four children had been born healthy, but not this one.

She's in the seventh month of her pregnancy. She heads to Dallas TX from Alaska to speak at an energy conference.

Her water breaks. She gives her thirty-minute speech anyway. She doesn't go to a hospital. She hops on a plane, and gets back to Alaska over a half a day later. Then she goes into a hospital, where her Downs Syndrome baby is born prematurely.

Makes one wonder, doesn't it?

Years ago, a friend of mine went on vacation with his late-term pregnant wife. They headed to the beach, a several hour drive away. Her water broke. They headed back, to return to a hospital (and doctor) close to home. The fetus died enroute, was still-born when delivered. My friend's wife was very upset. She blamed him. They divorced.

Palin's husband said he didn't want his fifth kid born in Texas. This was his explanation for why his wife, Sarah Palin, didn't immediately go to a nearby hospital after her water broke, but instead gave a speech and then flew all the way back to Alaska.

Makes one wonder, doesn't it? About how delighted they were to have a Downs Syndrome baby join their family, especially after prenatal testing indicated that this would be the case?

Maybe it was subconscious? I don't know. But it does make one wonder. A self-induced miscarriage would be an act of God, wouldn't it? It wouldn't be an abortion, per se. Hours and hours after the water broke in Dallas, once the mother finally arrived at the hospital in Alaska, the poor little premature Downs Syndrome fetus just didn't make it...right?

Makes one wonder, doesn't it?

Those who try to accuse Hilzoy of playing politics with Palin's family really should wise up. It is McCain campaign and Palin herself who have repeatedly made her family an issue. Five kids--check. Down syndrome child not aborted (as Palin said, they chose to have keep the child)--check. Dragging the said family to all political rallies--check.

So, what happens? First, we find out that Sarah Palin is a redneck fundie with a penchant for abusing power. Then we get the news that this fundie's minor daughter is several months pregnant and this had been known prior to her selection for Veep. Then Palin says, "We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby..." Excuse me? They are "proud of the decision"? What kind of fundie is this woman if she fails to convey to her daughter the fundamental importance of abstinence (clearly birth control is not an option in the Palin household) and then tells the world that having a baby is a choice?? OOPS!!!

This is nuts! The religious right should be turning away from this obvious hypocrite in droves. Instead, they are trying to make the best of a bad situation: "'Fortunately, Bristol is following her mother and father's example of choosing life in the midst of a difficult situation,' Family Research Council president Tony Perkins said." Apparently, Perkins also admits that Bristol Palin had a choice. He is not alone. " Evangelical leader Richard Land also backed Palin completely. 'This is the pro-life choice. The fact that people will criticize her for this shows the astounding extent to which the secular critics of the pro-life movement just don't get it,' Land said in a statement."

How stupid ARE these people? If they acknowledge that this is a choice, then their entire ideology is unsound (even if consider some of these choices to be "bad").

I think her family would be better served if she had declined the VP nomination. If faced with the same opportunity and situation, I would have to decline. I don't think exposing my daughter to the scrutiny of this media frenzy would be a very good representation of my family values. Let's all think for a minute about the selfishness of this woman's decision. Couple that with her willingness to use taxpayer resources to pursue a personal vendetta, and you have someone who is not true to what they represent.

I understand and sympathize with not wanting to deal with the personal side of this issue, but one of the core problems with the Republican Party is that the wing of the party Palin represents doesn't believe anyone outside their movement should enjoy that right of privacy. I also think how she feels about abstinence and her daughter's pregnancy is a pertinent question. If your own daughter can't stick with the program, should you be funding it for example?

The problem that often arises with politicians is when they set up one set of standards for the general public and a different set of standards for themselves or their friends, and then make no effort to reconcile those differences. Back when bussing was an issue, liberal politicians sending their children to private schools was a very pertinent issue.

Invoking Chelsea Clinton is a very bogus point to raise. The attacks that were generally lobbed against her say invoked her appearance, not anything she did. Attacking Palin's baby for having Down Syndrome would clearly cross a line. If Chelsea Clinton had say been caught doing drugs while the Clintons were in the White House or had had a baby out of wedlock, that would have been a relevant question the Clintons probably would have needed to answer.

Thanks for this post Hilzoy. I think family might be relevant as part of a hypothetical, but even in that case it could be hypothetical family. I apologize for the suggestion that it might be relevant to her support for abstinence only education.

Sara Palin is bringing a trash factor to the election. Educated people do not have 17 year olds knocked up. Mrs. Palin just got a passport last year. Plain and simple - she is a hick. Do we want her as 2nd in Command. I was on the fence before McCain's nomination but no longer. Mrs. Palin should be home with her own newborn and back in Alaska to help her daughter not out campaigning for a position she does not have the credentials for.

I will say that the Republicans have done a masterful job at bringing a non-issue (abortion) to the forefront of this election. Abortion is so low on the list of what's really at stake in this election, and this tactic has taken the focus of the fact that our country is at a cross roads. The Republicans don't want people to focus on the real issues plagueing our country, because they are largely to blame for this mess. Perhaps we need to stop paying attention to this Palin non-sense, and get back to the real issues.

Palin ought to have thought about her daughter's privacy when she accepted the VP nomination.

I feel sorry for the girl, but whatever she is suffering right now (including, possibly, being forced to give birth and/or get married) is the fault of her parents.

furlong said, "Educated people do not have 17 year olds knocked up." You're right furlong. No one ever knows that educated peoples daughters are pregnant because many of them see to it that their daughters have abortions.

JC, I don't agree with your statement. It has nothing to do with education, and everything to do with personal choice. My choice is pro-life. "Educated" comes into play with the understanding that people have the right to make their own choices, and knowing that politicians can't legislate morality.

I cannot believe someone from the left used the phrase "right to privacy" in the context of this story, condemns the parents, yet doesn't condemn the media and blogosphere storm about this subject matter.

This story has gone so far into the gutter on the internet and in the MSM that regardless of my personal political cynacism, I'm appalled. Using a 17 year old girl as fodder to attack a candidate and a party is ethically wrong. You've got plenty of other acceptable criticism, you should be using THAT to make your points.

Not off the back of a teenager. You can blame her parents for it, but if you're the one typing the dreck, it's on YOU.

There is no excuse for it.

JR, Sarah Palin made her daughter an issue by accepting this nomination. Republicans made her the nominee to make this an issue. They want to rally their base around abortion, and turn the debate to this non-issue. Republicans want to avoid the real issue of this election, which is the economy. They have in part created this economy, and have a clear plan of staying the course to fix it. McSame is not offering anything new.

I am outraged when I heard S. Palin?s response to her teenage daughter?s pregnancy:
?We are proud of our daughter ? and even prouder to be grandparents??
What is there to be proud of? How could anyone be proud when your daughter is pregnant before she finishes high school? Aren?t we supposed to be proud of our accomplishments, not our failures? Please, we don?t need leaders who glorify teenage pregancies. I thought young women are supposed be trained as future CEOs, scientists, doctors, and leaders, not getting themselves in trouble as teens, and have to put their education and future on hold.

I am going to be a grandmother soon and I can stand up tall and say I am very proud. Unlike Gov. Palin?s daughter, my daughter is married and is a doctor. In our house, we go to school first. Had Palin raised her daughter to aspire to greater things, perhaps taking challenging classes in high school, maybe today her daughter won't have to parade in front of the national in shame.

Actually, Chelsea Clinton is so ugly because Webster Hubbell is her father. Chelsea looks a lot more like him than she does Bill Clinton.

But I don't remember the Republicans trying to score political points by using Chelsea, all through the 8 years of the Clinton administration. It was established early that Chelsea was off-limits, and it pretty-much stayed that way.

Unless you're talking about them taking on Chelsea during this past primary, which was legitimate because she was actively campaigning for her mother, and she was 28 years old, not 17.

By the way, Obama is on the other side of this "Bristol Pregnancy" equation. His mother was an unmarried 17-yr old who go knocked up by a married man when BO was conceived, who then committed bigamy by marrying her and sticking around a little while before he split.

So how much room does he have to criticize anyone here?

Well, after researching the Alaska Permanent Funds, which is generated by tacking a 25%+ fee to the cost of our oil and an additional windfall tax increase for the oil industry,it seems that Alaskans are making a tidy little profit off the backs of us consumers. I might add, the Federal Govt. new better to add this tax because it would trickle down to the consumer - and even McCain was against it. Sounds a little like raising taxes on the Corporate Companies - but I thought that was against Rep. economic policies?

Well, my point is....each Alaskan will receive about $3,000 EACH off the backs of oil consumers. So, maybe that's why it's not viewed as a bad thing in Alaska to pop babies out left and right - it's profitable.

Also, I wonder why Palin's daughter was out of school in the spring of 2008? I hope it wasn't to take care of her mother's child. It seems to me that the daughter is probably going to be raising both children, while her mother chases her career. The teenager seems to display a stronger bond to the baby, so it's probably better. I watched Palin with her youngest, and it seems as though she's a little detached - as if the child is just a pet she's required to watch.

With Alaska having such a windfall of revenues - much more per capita than probably any other state, it's a no-brainer that she didn't struggle much to balance the budget there. It's an entire different ball game for our Federal Budget.

Oh, and I wonder why nobody's talking about her involvement in the polictical Alaskan party that wanted to declare independence? That doesn't sound like country first. She's a hypocryte, plain and simple.

Okay. I have read through some of this stuff.
I am an 18 year old girl who just graduated high school in May. In my graduating class, there was 4 girls who already had a child. As of now, there is 5 more that have had a baby within the last month, or are expecting. This says nothing at all about the parents values. I am sure the majority of you are older than 18 years old, so you were a teenager at one point. I am pretty sure that you remember your parents telling you something and you looking at them like they were crazy.
Bristol Palin being pregnant does not make Sarah Palin less of a Christian women, nor does it mean she does not have family values.