Palin’s Teenage Daughter is Pregnant
John McCain’s running mate Sarah Palin said Monday that her 17-year-old unmarried daughter is pregnant.
A statement released by the campaign said that Bristol Palin will keep her baby and marry the child’s father.
“Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. We’re proud of Bristol’s decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents,” Sarah and Todd Palin said in the brief statement.
“Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family,” they added.
Senior McCain advisers said the Arizona senator and his top aides had known about Bristol’s pregnancy before offering Palin the No. 2 spot on the GOP ticket.
Discuss.
Here’s hoping your readers are a little bit more adult than the ones posting on Democratic Underground and Daily Kos - otherwise, this is going to get ugly fast. You know, liberals adore love and compassion until someone has an opportunity to throw a 17-year-old kid under the bus to attack a politician. Then, to hell with decency.
As much as parents hate it, kids will be kids, and kids with liberal parents and conservative parents often make the same kinds of mistakes. This is one of them. But I will look forward to hearing people blame this on Sarah Palin being a bad parent, or how it’s her fault because she supported abstinence-only education, or how she’s being a terrible mom because she’s not just going home to take care of her special needs kid. Funny how all the liberals are huge fans of stay-at-home mommery all of a sudden. We need more women in politics, unless they are conservative moms. Those women should all go home and clean the living room.
As far as I’m concerned, it’s a non-criminal family matter involving a minor child. The kid’s not running for public office. Leave her alone. End of discussion.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on September 01, 2008 at 1321 hrsBristol and the young man she will marry
Marry? Interesting…
I don’t know… I have no opinion. Whatever a family chooses to do I guess I support. Glad it ain’t me in that situation.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1326 hrs- Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1340 hrs
This news changes absolutely nothing about Palin’s qualifications to be second-in-charge of America.
She is just as desperate a pick today as she was before this came out.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1358 hrsGrumps:
Please tell me Obama’s qualifications to be PRESIDENT. His brief time in the Illinois Senate, his many years in the U.S. Senate (joking). Tell me how he is more qualified than Gov. Palin? Yes he is a great speaker, but so is Tony Robbins. Gov. Palin has actually run something.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1407 hrsIt occurs to me that young Bristol might have benefitted from some comprehensive sex education--the kind her mother opposes.
I don’t know… I have no opinion. Whatever a family chooses to do I guess I support.
Not exactly true. You don’t support anyone’s choice to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.
Does her daughter’s predicament make me think ill of Palin’s ability to govern? Not really. I don’t see why anyone should draw that conclusion. But it does make me wonder whether she was actually vetted before being offered the job.
Posted by scott on September 01, 2008 at 1409 hrsGuess that means the Democrats were equally desperate when they pushed aside guys with decades of experience like Bill Richardson to pick the skinny black kid who’s good on the mike and whose only experience in politics is running for the next office?
The simple fact is that both sides are guilty of playing identity politics in this election by putting inexperienced candidates on the ballot to pander on gender and race. No way the Democrats nominate an articulate white guy with 3 years in the Senate. None. No chance. Hell, Dan Quayle had more experience in federal government and with foreign relations than Obama (he spent years on the Armed Services Committee).
So if Palin is all about picking a woman, the same logic dictates that Obama is all about picking a black guy. Everyone lives in a glass house on this issue. If anyone wants to throw the stone, they should expect that someone will be prepared to whip it right back at them.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on September 01, 2008 at 1420 hrsBut it does make me wonder whether she was actually vetted before being offered the job.
Scott, by all media accounts, Palin informed McCain of the situation during the interview process. Neither you nor I nor anyone has any proof to the contrary.
So the question then is, why is your implication that such advance knowledge should have disqualified Palin? Or do you simply think that Republicans (or Democrats for that matter) are incapable of looking past a family situation like that?
No malice in there. Just an honest question.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on September 01, 2008 at 1424 hrsSo? This is a family matter, not for the voters. Yes, sex education might have helped, but we should let them deal with it the best any parent can.
Don’t know what her view is on stem cell research, but with a child with Down Syndrome she is clearly going to have to do some serious soul searching, should she ever be put in a position that she has to take a position.
That McCain has picked an inexperienced female as VP, simply to sway Clinton’s women voters rather than because she is experienced and qualified to be president, is a bit disappointing. And though I really like her personally, it may indeed backfire. He also cannot now complain that Obama is inexperienced.
Posted by Jack Lohman on September 01, 2008 at 1452 hrsIt does underline the lunancy of abstinence only sex ed though. I’m not arguing comprehensive sex ed would have resulted in her daughter avoiding the pregnancy mind you, but it gives you a lot better chance than telling teenagers that they should simply ignore their biology.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1526 hrsLefty,
You have no idea what she taught her daughter. Maybe she taught her abstinence only. Maybe she taught her how to use condoms. Heck, she may have even been on birth control. I don’t know. Neither do you. So using this situation as some sort of proof of the value of sex education borders on idiocy.
Posted by Owen on September 01, 2008 at 1536 hrsJack:
I really do not think that McCain picked Palin as VP to try and sway Clinton voters. Most Clinton voters are not going to vote for McCain. I know that and you know that. Palin is a reformer and fresh face and has more executive experience than Obama. I really wanted her to be the pick. We should stick to the issues here. So what if she is inexperienced on foreign policy matters, (how do you know she is?). Obama is not that experienced here either.
She is adamant against pork spending and bad government. You should love her Jack. If it was going after Clinton voters, McCain wanted he should have picked Hutchenson.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1540 hrsI agree. The woman thing was a bonus. I think McCain picked her to enhance his “reform” mantra, counter Obama’s “outsider” theme, and appeal to the conservative base.
Posted by Owen on September 01, 2008 at 1601 hrsHe chose her because she appeals to the social conservatives (who don’t like McCain all that much), and also as a lame attempt to appeal to disaffected Clinton supporters (all six of them).
He did not choose her because she’d be an asset when actually governing, however, which is sad.
Posted by scott on September 01, 2008 at 1604 hrsInevitably we learn Superwoman is human. I’m not sure what to think here, but will admit that maybe Mom wasn’t active enough in the kids lives as she’s running for Governor, nor was Dad, as he was out snowmobiling across Alaska. To be honest I’m curious how this whole family does as much as they have reportedly done the last 15 years given that I know how tough it is for myself, wife and three kids to just manage everyday life.
I think this election still comes down to whether Palin can function when questioned hard by a big lib like Olberman or Andrea Mitchell. If she passes with flying colors, McCain wins the election. If not, I think he’s got some challenges. The base has to continue to be excited about the Palin pick.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1606 hrsInstead of focusing on experience focus on acomplishments, Gov. Palin has way more that Obama does.
This situation is not relevant to the campaign. Many good families have this happen to them, as well as drugs, etc. No matter how many times you tell them.
What is more of issue, is Obama’s relationships with questionable people and dirty dealings in politics.
I think Gov. Palin is going to surprise many people with her wit, intelligence, intgrity and honesty. These are the qualities I want in a President or a VP, the rest is BS.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1608 hrsScott:
I must respectfully disagree with you. Most HC voters are not going to vote for her, McCain knows this. Also, regarding social conservatives, their are many others he could have picked from.
He chose her because she is a winner and does not back down and the Republicans need a fresh face. Not the same old tired faces.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1613 hrsWow! I have no opinion on this except it does not impact my opinion that Palin is still a great pick. McCain knew of this situation and still went with her. Good for him.
Yes, it is a shame government wasn’t more involved in raising Sarah’s child. I am sure she would have turned out better, like a Katrina vicim still living in a FEMA trailer.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1619 hrsI DO love her, John. I think she’d be an excellent VP and with the right advisors even a decent president. But I’m not so gullible to believe that her gender played no role.
I agree with Scot (#14). But the conspiracy theorists are out. If the claims that the Down child are true it will get messy. See
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Video-Is-Bristol-Palin -Ba-by-the-web-080831-377.htmlAnd I hope they don’t get into Obama’s closet, because up will pop Charles Keating and the S&L;scandal. I think they should concentrate on who’s best going forward.
Posted by Jack Lohman on September 01, 2008 at 1638 hrsWell, this will get used--on both sides. Not using it is like ignoring an itch. Of course, everyone will claim they are not using it--all the while they are talking about it.
Governor Palin is in the situation of many parents. Her daughter has presented her with a fact: she is pregnant at 17 while still in high school.
I understand why she says she is “proud” of her daughter. Given Gov. Palin’s opposition to abortion and given that her daughter has chosen to have the baby, she has to say she is proud. Certainly, she must be relieved. But I’m sure she is also disappointed. The stigma of unwed parenthood is pretty much gone. But Governor Palin knows what this will do to her daughter’s life. Change it forever. Not ruin it (because she has her family’s support), but make it harder. Cut short her last carefree days of young adulthood. Out of order.
But, on the other hand (as Tevye said), there is a grandchild on the way. Not in the best of circumstances, but a grandchild! Now there is a reason to be happy!
I can only assume that before accepting the veep nomination, she discussed with her daughter the fact that this would be very, very public.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1805 hrsInteresting news which will show the utter hypocrisy of both sides. Dems will be in a position to bash a young single mother. a core constituency , while the GOP will be defending will be defending a young woman who is had sex out of wedlock. You could not make this stuff up.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1825 hrsObama has said that he will not use this information to his benefit.
Right.
Something smells really, really rotten. And it’s not Bristol.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1915 hrsFrank,
I don’t think you’ll see many of us on the right defending the girl. There will be many who defend her from being thrown into the political arena, but not many who defend her behavior.
Posted by Owen on September 01, 2008 at 1926 hrsAm I the only one who sees the mirror of this situation to Chippewa Falls Democratic State Senator Pat Kreitlow’s daughter - which our side didn’t even touch, it was brought up by a liberal talker in Eau Claire in 2006 - and then seeing the left wing orgy in this state that makes me want to puke?
Enjoy your moments in the sun being pointed out for the hacks and hypocrites so many of you are.
Both kids screwed up, both have loving parents who are there for their children, both of these girls are becoming adults long before they should. You wish this didn’t happen and could turn back the clock for both these girls, but you can’t. So can we all agree that we should just leave them both alone, okay.
Politics is no doubt bloodsport, but there’s been at least one recognized rule by all sides since the dawn of time: Leave the kids out of it as long as it’s not illegal.
Can we leave it at that? Bristol Palin and Pat Kreitlow’s daughter are going to have enough challenges in their lives ahead of them.
Posted by Kevin Binversie on September 01, 2008 at 1933 hrsI would have to agree with Owen’s statement:
There will be many who defend her from being thrown into the political arena, but not many who defend her behavior.
Enough is enough. (Agreeing with Kevin Binversie, too)
Nobody is saying “Good for Bristol! You go girl!” The reaction that is being heard nationwide is one of protection. Political protection. Media protection. Common decency.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1940 hrsKevin, as we both know, Kreitlow didn’t represent an attack opportunity because of the even messier personal life of his opponent.
Stay classy, Kev.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 1958 hrsObservation:
The fact that the young woman’s pregnancy is national news is 100% because of a political/career choice her mother made. I’m not suggesting that Gov. Palin should have turned down the offer to run for veep. But all the reaction--including the very ugly kind--was completely predictable.As I said earlier, I assume this was discussed in the family. I assume the Governor, her husband and her daughter believe they can handle this. I hope, for their sakes, they are right.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 2003 hrsI would sure hope we can leave the family problems out of this, but there are some who will not. Any of us that have raised kids know that as hard as you try, it doesn’t always work out so good. Nor do I think Obama’s cocaine use is relevant.
Posted by Jack Lohman on September 01, 2008 at 2005 hrsLefty,
You have no idea what she taught her daughter. Maybe she taught her abstinence only. Maybe she taught her how to use condoms. Heck, she may have even been on birth control. I don’t know. Neither do you. So using this situation as some sort of proof of the value of sex education borders on idiocy.
Owen, you aren’t accusing Palin of being a hypocrite are you?
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?
SP: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Palin_oppos ed_sexed.html?showall
Just as we know she’s pro-life, we also know she supports absitinence only sex-ed. Now you’re right, I don’t know what she actually did in raising her daughter. But we are to believe that one of her virtues is she walks the walk. Seems to me something about this pro-life Gov deciding to have a child disagnosed with down-syndrom and not having an abortion was shoved down the public’s collective conscience the other day. So I guess I assumed she practiced what she preached when it came to educating her children about sex as they grew up.
And as sarcastic as that all reads I’m being honest about that.
Now don’t start thinking I’m calling her a bad mom or something. I’m sure she’s a great mom, she seems very genuine in her beliefs. I just think very strongly that subscribing to this particular belief is really narrow minded and does a diservice to our kids.
So for me this underscores why this is a bad public policy position. Believe it or not, I’m not trying to be a partisan prick here. I think it is a fair (because of Palin’s public stance on the issue) and horribly unfair (because her daughter did nothing to warrant the entire nation knowing this much about he sex life) discussion.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 2141 hrsAgain, stuff like this and troopergate and her possible recall when Mayor of the 6,000 town raises questions about McCain’s judgement. Is he ready to lead?
By the way guys. You keep harping on Obama’s specific policies. Where’s McCains other than hear about Paris Hilton and lying about Obama’s tax program?
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 2143 hrsOwen, you aren’t accusing Palin of being a hypocrite are you?
Not at all. For example, I oppose many aspects of government taught sex education, but I support teaching my daughters and son about protecting themselves. It’s not always about what’s being taught. It’s about who should be teaching it.
Posted by Owen on September 01, 2008 at 2147 hrsI don’t know… I have no opinion. Whatever a family chooses to do I guess I support.
Not exactly true. You don’t support anyone’s choice to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.
Once again Scott, you’re shooting in the dark. You have a habit of consistently assuming my positions and you’ve consistently been wrong. I’m amazed at how willing you are to try to make a point with facts that are not in evidence (and in fact not even true)
You’re a piece of work
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 2206 hrsHere’s the thing.
This girl should be left out of it, but I don’t see how these circumstances can or should be left out of it.
As Owen reminded us a while ago, speaking on cultural issues makes you fair game for commentary. One of Palin’s “qualifications” for VP, according to partisan hacks on TV and callers to Vicki McKenna on Friday, is that she is a great mother. If her great motherhood is a political issue, then family failures are, unfortunately, a political issue as well. This is doubly true in the case of a candidate who preaches conservative positions like abstinence-only education in an instance where abstinence-only has obviously either not been preached, or practiced successfully.
It’s the same hypocrisy, or faillings, that led to the political demise of Larry Craig, or Mark Foley, or that Republican in Florida who was caught offering a cop $20 to give a BJ.
Yes, I am quite certain the lunatics and the hacks at DU or Huffington are all over this poor girl for all the wrong reasons (schadenfreude). The simple fact is, if Obama had a 17 year-old daughter who got pregnant during the campaign, right-wing hacks and lunatics would be all over that as an obvious example of how liberals have no family values. Imagine Vicki McKenna’s show, for weeks, if that alternative were the case. Anyone who denies it is full of BS.
I think, as a dad, the larger issue here is that Gov. Palin has a 5 month-old (with special needs no less) and a 17 year-old daughter who is expecting a child and yet she is going to campaign for VP. I’d have no problem with a mother of older children, but those two factors together have me seriously questioning her “family values”, because those two circumstances would seem, to me, to require an extreme amount of attention and devotion.
The larger issue though is McCain’s judgment. It is becoming somewhat obvious that the vetting process here was lacking, not to mention he and his campaign had to know this would cause an uproar. He could have chosen an Olympia Snowe, or a Kaye Hutchison, or some other mroe qualified woman with less pressing family issues and he could have spent slightly more time with her before doing it.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 2224 hrsOh and watching Larry King tonight made one thing clear: There needs to be a federal law that bans Michelle Bachmann from appearing on television. That woman has a blankness that is downright scary.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 2227 hrsLast I checked Obamas momma was only 18 years old when she had him, 7 months after she married Obamas father. Of course he wouldn’t use this to smear anyone its basically the same method he came into existence.
The pregnancy does raise an interesting issue for Obama who basically said that if one of his little girls made a mistake he would hope they had the option for an abortion. I’m paraphrasing of course.
This is a non-issue but the slimeball left will make it an issue because its all they got.
Oh and Grumps Palin is so much more qualified then Obama it’s not even worth the discussion.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 2328 hrsThe fact that her daughter is pregnant has nothing to do with her parenting skills. As a parent you can instill values into your children but you can’t be everywhere they are. Palin’s daughter made a poor choice but its one I have no doubt she is going to live with and overcome.
The irony is that Palin’s daughter is the exact person the Democrats attempt to pander to.
Posted by on September 01, 2008 at 2332 hrsHey Gov. Palin, how’s that abstinence only working out for you?
Posted by on September 02, 2008 at 0054 hrsDon’t be surprised if she backs out of the VP slot because of the hardship it is playing on her family.
Posted by Jack Lohman on September 02, 2008 at 0113 hrsThe reason this is an issue is that Republicans and the MSM have been slamming Obama for “lack of experience"--as he’s pointed out, his campaign alone involves handling 10 times as many employees and much more budgeting of time and money than Palin has had to deal with, much less the fact that he is a US Senator, previously a State Senator, and prior to that a “pulled himself up by his bootstraps” success story who went from the experience of being a mixed race child growing up in the 60’s and 70’s (not that you two would know anything about what THAT would have been like--but I am the same age as him, and I remember well what mixed race marriages and children were treated like.) to coming out as a top student at Harvard (on scholarships and student loans--not Daddy’s silver spoon) to leaving a prestigious law firm in order to help people in a very difficult time in one of the poorest urban areas of the country--South Chicago.
The Republicans have been slandering Michelle Obama for “leaving her children” while she helps her husband on the campaign trail--though both she and Barack are frequently with them and her mother watches them when they can’t be. Michelle is not running for high office--and will be available to parent during her husband’s Presidency.
So, now here comes a woman who has supposedly been the conservative religious right wing darling of “family values"--opposing not only abortion, but birth control, sex education, and having no experience AT ALL running a budget bigger than her tiny little town of Wasilla (which I hear she did not do well at all with). The Alaska budget does not require her to balance anything or deal with taxes, as there is no state income tax in Alaska. The money in Alaska comes from Big Oil--and she’s obviously in their pockets.
But there is no right at all to spout “family values” on the one hand and then act like having a Down’s syndrome baby requires no more than 3 months of mothering before she leaves him to go on the campaign trail.
And she’s definitely got no right to try to gain office to legislate what MY daughters can and cannot be taught in school about their bodies or what choices they will be able to legally make as young women, when quite obviously HER version of things didn’t work so well.
I can only imagine what you guys would be saying if the tables were turned!
Posted by on September 02, 2008 at 0224 hrsFiora, Fiora…
Posted by on September 02, 2008 at 0516 hrs
Nobody is trying to legislate what your daughters can and cannot be taught regarding their choices as young women. Nope. They are simply trying to legislate that all people have a right to LIVE.
Does anyone think the hardline right is being duped by Sarah Palin’s political duplicity after reading the statement about the daughter’s pregnancy and Sarah’s own recent pregnancy? Here’s where the real issue exists. In a “prepared” written statement, the Palins proclaim. “We’re proud of Bristol’s decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents.” Bristol’s “decision”? Isn’t that “pro-choice” for Sarah Palin’s daughter? Similarly, as a minor, why would their daughter even have a “choice” in the matter? And while the media hangs on every extemporaneous verbal comment by the candidates, a prepared written statement acknowledging a minor’s “choice” to have her baby and continue the pregnancy is made by a candidate who claims to support the denial of these rights to all other women and married couples.
Sarah Palin’ own recent pregnancy raise the same “pro-choice” concerns for the hard right. First, she is protrayed as knowing the Down’s Syndrome affliction of the child she carried and “chose” to have the child anyways. Similarly, her own pregnancy demontrates she did consider abortion as a choice. That is, in order to know she was going to have a Down’s Syndrome child, she had to have been offered and consented to an invasive procedure (amniocentisis - sp?), agreed to genetic testing and agreed to be advised of the results. If she is hard “pro-life” as she is being branded for the right, once she knew she was pregnant, there was no need for the tests or the results since the information was irrelevant to the pregnancy. Her alleged hard pro-life principles required her to carry the fetus to term regardless of the information obtained. These facts and her admission she “chose” to carry the fetus to term upon obtaining and considering this information shows she does in fact support choice. The bottom line is she is duping the “pro-life” with her politically expedient branding while she engages in conduct which evidences “pro-choice”. In short, “choice” for me and mine, but not for the rest of you. Now, if only the media will explore these stark contradictions for the voters and make her explain the unexplainable. Peace, Out. By Lance Free
Posted by on September 02, 2008 at 0654 hrsInteresting points by Lance
Posted by on September 02, 2008 at 0916 hrsbut will admit that maybe Mom wasn’t active enough in the kids lives
Everyone who told their mother every detail of their sexual activity when they were 16 raise your hand. Isn’t that the reason people insist 12-year-old girls need to be able to obtain abortions without parental consent--that kids having sex shouldn’t have to tell their parents about it?
once she knew she was pregnant, there was no need for the tests or the results since the information was irrelevant
That’s B.S. People get tests done even if they’re not considering abortion so they know what’s coming and they can be prepared for the first day at home. It’s easier to “meet the challenges” if you have a couple months’ notice to get organized.
And she’s definitely got no right to try to gain office to legislate what MY daughters can and cannot be taught in school about their bodies
Isn’t that interesting that the left has these demands about what all children can and cannot be taught in school about their bodies, about the climate, about gay people, about homeless people, about “social justice” but heaven forbid anyone who disagrees with them on any of these issues try to have a say in what their children are taught.
This seems like a good argument to get government schools out of “social issues” altogether--Fiona can choose to teach her children about “safer sex” at home without interference.
Posted by HeatherRadish on September 02, 2008 at 1031 hrsI thought Nobama was the result of his “older” father banging his 17 year old mother and they never married. I also believe I heard Nobama’s father was a serial banger, got several other women preg. Would this be like the pot calling the kettle black for Nobama or his campaign to throw stones? I can’t believe hos vicious the left is. I thought these were the people of compassion. I guess if this young girl would have an abortion everything would be OK after all as far as they are concerned the only good “unwanted/unplanned” baby is a dead baby.
Posted by on September 02, 2008 at 1047 hrsIsn’t that interesting that the left has these demands about what all children can and cannot be taught in school
Yes. We want them taught the pragmatic and practical facts in sex ed, and we want them taught science in science class. What we “demand” from you is that you stop trying to thwart these efforts.
I thought Nobama was the result of his “older” father banging his 17 year old mother and they never married. I also believe I heard Nobama’s father was a serial banger, got several other women preg.
I can’t believe hos [sic] vicious the left is.
zOMG me neither!!!1
Posted by scott on September 02, 2008 at 1052 hrsBeing PRO LIFE is a CHOICE. This is pretty easy to understand, Lance. That is the CHOICE that was made by the daughter. To live out her CHOICE as a PRO-LIFER.
Your hair-splitting makes me yawn.
Maybe her daughter drives a Mercedes and has extravagant nail sessions. Let’s focus on something else.
Posted by GMazy on September 02, 2008 at 1217 hrsBeing PRO LIFE is a CHOICE. This is pretty easy to understand, Lance. That is the CHOICE that was made by the daughter. To live out her CHOICE as a PRO-LIFER.
Your hair-splitting makes me yawn.
Maybe her daughter drives a Mercedes and has extravagant nail sessions. Let’s focus on something else.
Who gets an amnio if they know they are carrying their baby to term no matter what? Who risks the potential for the amnio to cause an early termination of the pregnancy if you know you won’t have an abortion no matter the result of the test.
And don’t tell me this is private family business when the McCain put out her decision to have a child with Down Syndrom to prove how pro-life John McCain had become.
Posted by on September 02, 2008 at 1252 hrsHow long before this pic ends up in a moveon ad?
Posted by on September 02, 2008 at 1256 hrsSeeing as how it’s photoshopped.... probably not very long.
Posted by Owen on September 02, 2008 at 1257 hrsSeeing as how it’s photoshopped.... probably not very long.
Which one of us is supposed to be cynical towards moveon? I’m confused here?
Posted by on September 02, 2008 at 1300 hrsI don’t even know where to begin ...
First off ... Sarah Palin may have preached a lifetime of abstience only to her daughter, only to have Bristol conclude that her mom was nuts. My God! A 17 year old who rejects the teachings and advice of a parent. That MUST mean Sarah is not involved enough in her kids life, though, right? Of course, there are thousands of 17 year olds a year who get comprehensive sex education in the schools and wind up pregnant also. Is that an idictment of Sex Ed?? To try and use her pregnancy to make political hay on the issues of sex education and abstinence is idiotic.
#30 - Keith, I’ll trade you a full and public vetting of your so-called ‘TrooperGate’ and ‘Near Recall’ Scandals for a full and public vetting of Obama’s ties to Ayers and Rezko ... THEN we can let the American People decide who’s really ‘Scandal Ridden’. Bring it on, I say!
#33 - I wonder if you would have the same concerns about a male candidate for office with a child at home with special needs, or a 17 year old daughter at home with a baby on the way? Or is that a job specifically reserved for women to attend to. I notice you specifically point out that “ I’d have no problem with a mother of older children, but those two factors together have me seriously questioning her “family values”, because those two circumstances would seem, to me, to require an extreme amount of attention and devotion.” Yes ... the feminist movement has had quite an impression on your line of thinking, hasn’t it TosaVoter? Any concerns about a single father staying home to take care of 2 young boys in the wake of the death of thier mother???
#40 - Fiora, your statement at the end borders on facism. Of course she has every right to run for office. However, Its obvious you detest the thought of voters being presented with opinions different than your own, or a chance to vote for someone you may not agree with ... but here is the beautiful thing. Just like she has a right to run, you have a right to not vote for her.
#41 - Went to the Bill Clinton School of ‘Depends on what your Definition of Is Is’ did we??? Your construction of arguements about ‘choice’ are disingenous. Like Biden, your words don’t sound as impressive as you think they do. I wonder, if you are smart enough to figure out why MOST 43 year old expectant mothers have these types of tests done. If you do, then you know that your arguement about her having them done was disingenous at best ... and if you didn’t your simply ignorant. Neither choice bodes well for you.
45 - Scott, please tell me, how exactly has the teaching of your so-called practical and pragmatic sex ed facts have contributed to reducing the number of unwanted teen pregnancies since sex ed became a staple of teaching in public schools? And exactly which science are we trying to prevent you from teaching? ‘Man Made Climate Change?’, ‘Big Bang’?
Posted by on September 02, 2008 at 1457 hrsAnd THAT’S the rest of the story.
THE END
Posted by on September 02, 2008 at 1609 hrs
That is, in order to know she was going to have a Down’s Syndrome child, she had to have been offered and consented to an invasive procedure (amniocentisis - sp?), agreed to genetic testing and agreed to be advised of the results.
Someday you may be familiar with standard OB/GYN practice on “high risk” pregnancies. Let me give you a preview.
ANY pregnancy where the mother is over the age of 40 is considered “high risk.” That’s SOP. It may be because of the lawyers, but that’s the game.
In ANY “high risk” pregnancy, the OB runs a few more ‘mug shots’ of the baby on ultrasound, and takes a few more test-routines than for ‘normal-risk.’ Those tests/ultras probably showed the OB that there was a problem.
It is the OBLIGATION of the OB to disclose the nature of the problem. It is very likely that he did not ‘suggest’ an amniocentesis; he likely damn near ordered Palin to have one. The OB must know what he’s talking about before he talks.
Palin is not going to contramand her OB; she needs to know what’s going on, too. There could be something--or there could be nothing--but she should want to know.
You posit, without knowing, that she “decided” to have the baby. Not necessarily. She could well have been “decided” long before the results were in--that is to say, it was not a decision, merely an affirmation of her beliefs.
There’s the very short course.
Posted by dad29 on September 02, 2008 at 1916 hrs
Ol' Army
