Sarah Palin forced, again, to walk the anti-abortion talk

Her teenage daughter is pregnant -- and keeping the baby. That's one choice. There are others, but Sarah Palin doesn't want them to be available to young women who might not have the same resources that her daughter does.

CNN is reporting that Sarah Palin's 17-year-old daughter is five months pregnant -- and planning to marry the father:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/palin.daughter/index.html

*sigh*

How many lives are ruined by teen pregnancy when it could so easily be avoided?

People are going to demand that I give Palin points for walking the talk regarding her rabid anti-abortion stance, given that she has a baby with Down Syndrome, and now her teenage daughter is pregnant and planning to keep it.

But this isn't about her, and her life -- it's about other women who don't have the resources that she does, and what will happen to them when their choices are curtailed. Rich, well-connected women will always have access to birth control and abortion; it's the poor who pay the price whenever Palin and others of her ilk try to impose their views on the rest of society.

The best I can say is at least she's not a hypocrite, like the women profiled in The Only Moral Abortion Is My Abortion: When the Anti-Choice Choose.

So no. She doesn't get any points from me. I *don't* think she's reasonable, and I'm scared shitless of the idea of her potentially being one heartbeat away from the most powerful political position in the country.


Comments

Front-paged

Not so that we can gaze upon the evolving personal train-wreck that appears to be the Palin's private lives, but so that we may gape at the astonishingly historically crappy decision of John McCain to select a running mate with apparently no regard for her families best interest. These people don't need what's coming for them.

Meanwhile, stare at this response of Sarah Palin's to a question about Sex Education and try not to fall headlong into the rabbit hole:

Q: 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?

Sarah Palin: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.

Eagleton.

Eagleton.

Eagleton.

Her family values

astonishingly historically crappy decision of John McCain to select a running mate with apparently no regard for her families best interest. These people don't need what's coming for them.

This point bears more focus than I think a lot of people want to give it. It certainly reinforces the truism that the anti-abortion crowd is intensely interested in the fetus in the womb, but not so much in the human outside it.

Palin's daughter is seventeen and five months pregnant. This "family value" advocate, darling of the "family values" social conservatives who think nothing is more important than family, knew her child would be thrust into the spotlight, and also knew that just as this spotlight is bearing down hardest on a her during what has to be an incredibly difficult time, Palin herself would be out campaigning about what an advocate she is for family values.

HOW can these social conservatives be cheering? Is this not the most blatant example of absolute hypocrisy or is it just utter disassociation? Geez whatever it is, it stinks.

I can't tell

I can't tell if it's hypocrisy or disassociation but you're right that it was a bad choice to accept the nomination at this time, knowing that her family would be put under a microscope. I mean, good for them for standing by their daughter, but look at the timing. If daughter really is five months along now, she'll be eight months along and needing a lot of support, I imagine, just when her mother is out campaigning the hardest.

slight edit.

Many of us navigate the site from the Track Changes page, never actually peeking at the front page, or rarely. I took your teaser and added it to the main body because you make an important point there - this is their decision and they can do what they want. But, they want to take away decisions from others. Anyone who came straight to the body of the article, as I did, might read it as "That poor girl should have an abortion." Which isn't what you are saying. Hope you don't mind the edit and I would urge others to
place a:

<!--break-->

after the text you would like to be shown on the front page.

I don't think that Senator McCain doesn't care what's going on in the lives of Americans, I just think he doesn't know.

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

No problem, Robert

Thanks for the tweak. :)

The head-in-the-sand mentality...

I have trouble understanding it, especially when so many studies show that abstinence-only plans don't work.

Safe Sex starts at the Palin Home with family values

I have trouble understanding it, especially when so many studies show that abstinence-only plans don't work* angry girl

It appears that the only study conducted in her family was a total failure

Well

When you're told that the Stork brings babies, to "just say no" to sex, and that condoms don't work -- surprise! The stork brings you a baby. You just have to carry it around in your tummy for nine months before you get to see it...

The relevance

here is to spotlight health education policy, which has been a subject of major controversy during the Bush administration.

Bush administration and Republican Congress policy has been to push so-called "abstinence-only" education in our schools. They've gone so far as to tie federal education funds to the implementation of this doctrine. But those policies don't work. It's one thing to encourage teens to postpone sexual activity--and entirely appropriate to try--but it's a mistake to try to deny them the information they need to protect themselves whenever they do begin sexual activity (hopefully later, but it's not wise to count on that).

People who believe that "just don't do it" will work for all teens don't retain very clear memories of what it was like to be a teenager.

The publicly relevant decision made by candidate Sarah Palin was to oppose the availability of honest, comprehensive sexuality education in our schools. That's a bad public policy position, a continuation of bad Bush policy, and is a fair topic for debate.

Dan Besse

Dan Besse

As usual, you're spot-on :)

People who believe that "just don't do it" will work for all teens don't retain very clear memories of what it was like to be a teenager.

Yes, exactly. I waited until I was 22, and I was just about the last of my peer group.

The publicly relevant decision made by candidate Sarah Palin was to oppose the availability of honest, comprehensive sexuality education in our schools. That's a bad public policy position, a continuation of bad Bush policy, and is a fair topic for debate.

Absolutely. Obama has spoken up and wants us to leave the family alone. I want to be clear, I'm not picking on the daughter; Goddess only knows the stupid things I did when I was seventeen (and eighteen, and twenty-one...). It seems to me that the relevance is in Mrs. Palin's language when describing the situation: "We're proud of our daughter for choosing to have the baby." It all comes down to choice, and Mrs. Palin's opposition to the full range of options. As far as she's concerned, there IS choice: choose to not have sex, choose to keep the baby, or choose to give it up for adoption. Those are all valid, but they're not the best in every situation.

The judgement of John McCain is fair game, too, I think

He chose this train-wreck of a running mate after only meeting her once and talking to her twice. He only knows how to deal with women who are beauty queens; he has no intellectual honesty when it comes to dealing with half the human race.

Mrs. Palin may or may not be a good mother, she may or may not be a good governor of Alaska. She is not a good choice for Vice-President, simply because the man who chose her didn't know her. He saw her picture in a catalog.

Train wreck?

What is your screening criteria for one to become a "train wreck"?

A quick list

1. Secessionist.

2. Fundraiser for Indicted Senator.

3. Distracting unfolding personal issues.

4. Currently under investigation for abuse of power and office.

5. Dramatically limited elected experience.

6. Dramatically non-existent national experience.

7. Facing televised debate with Joe Biden in six weeks.

8. Untested in crucible of national media.

You should expand on #7.

I think it should read:
6. Facing televised debate with Joe Biden in six weeks where she will pit her international experienced based on living near Russia against his bazillion years as head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

I don't think that Senator McCain doesn't care what's going on in the lives of Americans, I just think he doesn't know.

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Expanding on National Security cred., or lack thereof...

McCain spokesdouche Tucker Bounds headed to CNN to spout off the usual list of Palin experience talking points, well, talking point. Luckily, Campbell Brown wasn't having it.

Covers it pretty well, I'd say.

It really is kind of funny watching the GOP do back flips to support this choice.

What's also funny is that McCain probably thought it was a stroke of genius and just can't understand why he isn't being applauded by firm-breasted, full-lipped women everywhere.

State Fascism runs the Right and Left! Ask Thunder Pig?

We on the Right view every new life as a gift from God*Thunder Pig

Exactly! That is what Hilter said! Now which Pagan God do you worship as the creation of God ThunderPig? No cheating now! And you can't used the movie " National Treasure" as your guide for procreation.

and the Left view them as burdens* Thunder Pig

Of course communists believe that! The States rules completly as the same with State Corporate Fascism does when it comes to life and death of the individual. Now be a good little Republican Nazi Thunder pig and kill a few communists for the common good of State Fascism.

The opinions expressed here only confirm it.* Thunder Pig

This is not the Republican Convention Thunder Pig! Opinions are not allowed at the Republican Convention, Why don't you ask those 10,000 Ron Paul folks gather in Minneapolis who are making fools of your Fascist convention.

I'm not a Christian

but even so, I forgive you for calling me inhuman.

Really?

Is that your final answer? So you will be rejecting war and the death penalty and endorsing free universal neo-natal care, full funding for foster programs, and better and expanded funding of the free and reduced lunch program tomorrow right?

edit- How about instead we just agree that everyone in America has a long way to go?

"Keep the Faith"

"Keep the Faith"

You forgot

high quality, affordable, accessible child care and health care once the child is here.

ThunderPig on children

Thunderpig comment on my YouTube video last year:

The people who have children should pay for the schools, and don't have more kids than you can afford.
Schools wouldn't be so expensive if the government weren't involved. Let the private sector solve the problem, and quit trying to STEAL my money for you rugrats.

Good find, Greg. The Pig sez god approves of kids

but only as long as god's footin' the bill. Which He only does, of course, for right-leaning, anti-science, theocrats like Silly Sarah.

American politics is now officially a Daily Show skit. And it's pretty damn funny.

_____________________________________

Jesus Swept, so you can come clean.

Inhumanity? Compare what you view as important with Jesus.

* Blessed are the poor, theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
* Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
* Blessed are the hungry, for they shall be satisfied.
* Blessed are those who seek righteousness, theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
* Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
* Blessed are the merciful, they will obtain mercy.
* Blessed are the pure of heart, for they will see God.
* Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the children of God.

It's funny how Republicans rely on the Old Testament and select parts of Leviticus for their definition of righteousness, while Democrats' beliefs more closely resemble those actually SPOKEN by Jesus.

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Here is...

The main problem with our assessments of Palin and McCain from the left. The Palin problems are long and we should feel good about our chances, but politics doesn't run that way...We're beginning to underestimate the GOP, and that's a huge huge issue going into the final two months of this campaign. Here's why:

-Gloating got us no where 8 years ago. I was 12, and not the political wonk I am today, but we (the Democratic Party) developed a sense of entitlement that Gore was going to have a fairly easy time of winning the election and that the worst that would happen would be one term of Bush with a better candidate lined up in 2004 (we also didn't anticipate Sen. Lieberman completely flubbing the debate with Cheney and underestimating him on issues like energy, taxes and foreign policy; much as I hate thinking it, but had Lieberman not flubbed that debate, history would be a lot different).

-Gov. Palin is a rugged campaigner. Yes, she's new to holding high office, but not new to campaigning for high office. In 2006, she took down not one, but two of the biggest names in Alaska politics in Frank Murkulski and Tony Knowles...after her primary win, I thought Knowles had the Governorship in the bag, and I was dead wrong. She's a big league campaigner, though a minor league talent at best in terms of experience.

-Palin can whip Biden on the energy debate. Sure, she comes from the nations largest producer of energy, but her husband works for BP and she's been around the Energy game longer than Biden, who needs a huge crash course on renewable energy, other than the rhetoric thrown around in the Senate every time an energy bill gets out of Committee. That's not to say Biden isn't a smart guy, he is, but energy is not why he was picked...he'll toe the line for us better than most, but I hope he doesn't pass the buck on that question in 6 weeks.

-Palin's brought in the money: over 10 million since her announcement as the VP, McCain pulled in 47 Million for all of August, a huge chunk of that is Palin. people on the Right are excited.

-The Right's excited...the base of the Republican Party for so long, which was having a hard time getting behind McCain in the first place, has absolutely loved the Palin pick. Things like yesterday's revelations will either help or hurt with hardcore conservatives, but sticking to the tried and true family values line will appeal...unless I'm playing the same game as some GOP operatives did in thinking Palin would pick off Hillary voters, which is possible.

Look, I think that the happenings yesterday surrounding Palin are unusual at best. A pregnancy in the family, being forced to answer for one of your staunchest beliefs and the ongoing investigations for her potential ethics issues are all damning. However, I warn that Democrats should not get too cocky...don't think we have this election in the bag...we did it once, and look where it's led us. Politics is a funny funny business...

We, as Democrats and as Americans should let this thing play out and push people to ask tough questions (i.e the MSM, when they will not ask the questions that we pose, we as members of the blogging community; and yes, I'm aware of my new status on this blog, but that will not defeat my point with this posting; have the power to do so), but to think we're going to win this election solely because Gov. Sarah Palin has a lot of murky issues (ethics scandal, teen pregnancy, staunch views nearly on the xenophobic) coming out of the gate is simply pushing the political envelope too far.

And would any of us want our families personal lives involved in any sort of campaign, especially one for the Presidency?

And yes, I know that it was the job of the McCain campaign to properly vet Palin as a candidate for Vice-President, but unless Palin knowingly lied (and since she was not under oath, could if she wanted to) to the campaign, this is what it is. Want to blame someone, blame John McCain and his staff for not doing their jobs properly, but do not attempt to use Sarah Palin's family for our own gain at the ballot box in November.

Finally: in the interest of full disclosure, I am not an active member of the Obama campaign, and am a student of politics. Also, I've only voted Democratic in the two years I've been legally eligible to vote.

Hello and welcome

You're certainly more involved, politically, than I was at your age. :)

I don't think anyone here is gloating, and if I came off that way, I apologize. It's not my intent to convince people that we have the election sewn up as a result of Sarah Palin's family issues. What this latest news highlights, IMO, is two things:

1. McCain has shown horrible judgment in offering Palin the VP slot. He and his handlers should have vetted the candidates a LOT more carefully, instead of just grabbing the first semi-acceptable-looking female; it's tokenism at its worst.

2. Abstinence-only plans, like those favored by the mother of a pregnant teen, DON'T WORK. This becomes relevant when that mother is put in a position to eliminate comprehensive sex-ed programs. If their little family wants to keep telling their kids that "the Stork" brings babies and that condoms don't work, that's all well and good -- especially when they're willing to support their kids who then go out, don't use condoms, and invariably get pregnant. But should the Republicans roll to victory in November, McCain and Palin will be in a strong position, like Bush has been, to make abstinence-only the law of the land when it comes to educating kids about sex. Yes, we already knew she was strongly anti-choice; news of her teenage daughter's pregnancy and subsequent "choice" to keep the baby only serves to underscore her commitment to the issue. And that, for me, is not a plus.

Timely reminder:

Good for you for reminding all of us about political reality.

Remember not just Lieberman-Cheney, but the probably more closely analogous Gore-Bush debates. The background/experience/qualifications gap set up such an expectation of performance differential that Gore was in trouble from the start. To "win" the public perception debate, it was only necessary for Bush to avoid drooling on himself in front of the cameras. He did, barely, and was acclaimed the surprise "winner" of the debates.

"Sarah Barracuda"--her high school point-guard nickname--is brighter and more articulate than George W. Bush ever was. We must NOT help set Biden up for "failure" in this debate!

Dan Besse

Dan Besse

We won't be able to control that

The media has already decided to repeat the Gore/Bush fiasco. As you predict, in a debate (or what passes for one) between the VP candidates, Palin will do just fine and everyone will say, "WOW! GENIUS!"

Very interesting input.

First and foremost, let me be the first of many to welcome to BlueNC! You offer a great perspective on a few of the really important aspects of this situation. Of course we shouldn't get cocky, or take anything for granted, but this is truly an important issue. It has NOTHING to do with the quality of Bristol Palin's decisions. It has NOTHING to do with Sarah Palin's ability to raise children. Anyone pursuing either of those angles is merely exploiting the situation.

In my opinion, what it speaks to on Palin's part is the irony and hypocrisy of the grossly failed ideology of abstinence-only MISeducation. It's yet another case of Republicans not practicing what they preach, and then crying foul when it all comes home to roost. One thing to keep in mind, this is getting blown out of proportions by the MSM. The initial calls of question to Palin's pregnancy, that ultimately resulted in the knowledge of her daughter actually being pregnant, were not from the Democratic base. You get a few hundred Kossacks that pursue every. single. angle. of a story, and all of the sudden the MSM runs with it as if the Obama campaign is at the forefront of the charges, demanding a Maury-esque paternity test episode. This is not the case. You won't find too many conspiracy theorists around BlueNC, save our friend Max, so I believe the comments being shared on this issue are well grounded and not to exploit the young girl and her decision.

As for McCain, this speaks volumes to his ability to be POTUS. When all of the speculation first settled on Obama's veep decision, EVERYONE in the McCain camp discussed how this was to be Obama's first "Presidential" task, stressing the importance of the vetting process as a litmus test for his judgement and character. When it was their turn to choose, they dropped the ball completely. Bear in mind that McCain wrapped up the nomination the first week of March, and they've just sent a dozen people to Masilla to further vet Palin. We ended up with Joe Biden, a man who I believe is NOT as detached from solid energy policy as as I fear you may think, and I couldn't be happier.

Remember that the McCain camp announced the pick of Palin 72 hours ago, and there are already 8-9 valid questionable things about her ability to lead. And when McCain keeps referring back to her genuineness and character, bear in mind that McCain himself only spoke with her on the phone ONCE before meeting to offer her the potential Presidency of our great nation.

And no, I'm not gloating. :]

Going silent for a few hours

At work I won't be able to read BlueNC but I'll be back this evening.

Palin

I take offense that she keeps calling herself just a "hockey mom". Don't insult me or my sport that way, lady.

Honestly, though I am really beginning to wonder if Palin isn't a distraction. She's too big of joke to be the real candidate. I have a sinking feeling that the republicans are going to pull a fast one. She's going to step out of the race for family obligations and McCain is going to nominate someone who would've never gotten past the convention crowd.