B. Palin's pregnancy -- Is it fair to discuss? Is it relevant?

24567…10

Comments

  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,836
    Pj_Gurl wrote:
    Obama has already made it very clear how he feels.

    MONROE, Michigan (CNN) – Barack Obama told reporters firmly that families are off-limits in this campaign, reacting to news that Sarah Palin’s 17-year-old daughter is five months pregnant.

    “Let me be as clear as possible,” said Obama, “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 Gov. Palin’s performance as governor, or her potential performance as a vice president.”

    Obama said reporters should “back off these kinds of stories” and noted that he was born to an 18 year-old mother.

    “How a 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’s off-limits.”

    The Illinois senator became aggravated when asked about rumors on liberal blogs speculating that Palin’s fifth child - Trig - is actually her daughter Bristol’s. A Reuters report Monday quotes a senior McCain aide saying that Obama’s name is in some of posts, “in a way that certainly juxtaposes themselves against their 'campaign of change,’”

    “I am offended by that statement,” Obama shot back, not letting the reporter finish his question. “There is no evidence at all that any of this involved us.”

    “We don’t go after people’s families,” Obama said. “We don’t get them involved in the politics. It’s not appropriate and it’s not relevant. Our people were not involved in any way in this and they will not be. And if I ever thought that there was somebody in my campaign that was involved in something like that, they’d be fired.”


    Nice statement Obama.

    I believe this to be true...and I'm sure there are 17 year olds that have gotten pregnant living in households that teach contraceptives. Maybe she never would have had sex if TV and movies didn;t show it all the time...without the ramification mostly. ;) See, this can go either way.

    I feel bad for the girl and what she's going to have to go through. Makes me wonder if Palin should have turned it down in order to save her daughter some of this crap. The girl made some poor choices and I'm sure Keith O'bamasman and the rest are going to make her pay dearly for it. How the family deals with this situation is more important that what happened.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,836
    darkcrow wrote:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/01/day-of-stunning-palin-dis_n_123065.html

    "Being a Christian does not mean you're perfect," said Focus on the Family founder James Dobson. "Nor does it mean your children are perfect. But it does mean there is forgiveness and restoration when we confess our imperfections to the Lord."

    so why no forgiveness for homosexuals?


    Well, I don't agree with their stance on homosexuals, but in order to get forgiveness they would say that you would have to CONFESS your sins/imperfections and not keep sinning.

    Although, it hardly seems like a big deal in the grand scheme of things to me.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • digster
    digster Posts: 1,293
    cincybearcat wrote:
    Well, I don't agree with their stance on homosexuals, but in order to get forgiveness they would say that you would have to CONFESS your sins/imperfections and not keep sinning.

    Although, it hardly seems like a big deal in the grand scheme of things to me.

    I think it's a pretty big deal that a man like that is one of the most prominent social conservatives in the country, and that you pretty much cannot be a prominent Republican without answering to his beck and call.
  • digster
    digster Posts: 1,293
    mdg164 wrote:

    The media can ignore Rev. Wright, Father Flager, Bill Ayers, and Tony Resco for nearly a year... yet they will be all over this in an instant! Obama was an adult when he associated with those guys. This girl is a minor, and she shouldn't be put through this. Also it really has no impact on the campaign.

    Maybe this story will be like those...it'll be big news for a week or two, and then people will actually get smart and realize there's too much to this election to get bogged down in bullshit politics. Sean Hannity, is that you? Feel free not to answer this post with talking points.
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,836
    digster wrote:
    I think it's a pretty big deal that a man like that is one of the most prominent social conservatives in the country, and that you pretty much cannot be a prominent Republican without answering to his beck and call.


    No, you misunderstood me, I meant to say I don't know why social conservatives make such a big deal out of gay marriage...they should "hate the sin, not the sinner", live and let live and let their God sort it out in the end.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • riffrandall
    riffrandall Posts: 685
    Best thing I've read on the subject. From jezebel:

    "When we waste our time and energy rooting around in someone's personal life for John McCain's next black baby, we are conceding to conservatives that they are right.

    There are dozens and dozens of legitimate reasons to oppose Sarah Palin — everything from her position on drilling to that on polar bears; her flip-flopping on the Bridge to Nowhere; her pro-life advocacy to her opposition to marriage equity. Let's focus on those legitimate reasons as to why people should oppose Sarah Palin and the McCain-Palin ticket rather than trying to be the next Karl Rove because, as Dan Rather might say, when you wrestle with a pig (i.e., shitty rumors like these), all you get is shit on you and the pig kind of likes it."
    "If you're looking for someone to pull you out of that ditch, you're out of luck."
  • Pacomc79
    Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
    It'd be very relevant if it can be proven she only received abstinance education would it not?

    Her mom and family are well off enough to take care of the baby if/when the impregnator run off. The taxpayer gets stuck with the rest of them and that pretty much dooms most pregnant teens to a very average life. Unless they get motivated to find a way to pull themselves out of it.

    What about everyone elses teenage kid that never learns anything about birth control or how it works?

    That's the relevance. It's not just a campaign issue, but I bet there are a lot of other people out there with pregnant teenagers.... and a hell of a lot more having unprotected sex even the ones that had "good" upbringings.

    Instead of debating her child... debate the methods being taught or not taught in the classroom and at home?

    What's really to debate about having a pregnant teenager? Loads of people from all walks have that. The only people that would demonize that might get a nosebleed from the high horse. Individual people especially younger people have been known to make bad decisions... all anyone can do is give them information and instruction and hope for the best.
    My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
  • digster
    digster Posts: 1,293
    riffrandall wrote:
    Best thing I've read on the subject. From jezebel:

    "When we waste our time and energy rooting around in someone's personal life for John McCain's next black baby, we are conceding to conservatives that they are right.

    There are dozens and dozens of legitimate reasons to oppose Sarah Palin — everything from her position on drilling to that on polar bears; her flip-flopping on the Bridge to Nowhere; her pro-life advocacy to her opposition to marriage equity. Let's focus on those legitimate reasons as to why people should oppose Sarah Palin and the McCain-Palin ticket rather than trying to be the next Karl Rove because, as Dan Rather might say, when you wrestle with a pig (i.e., shitty rumors like these), all you get is shit on you and the pig kind of likes it."


    Hear hear. I think that's the right approach. There are many legitimate criticisms to be made of this pick, just like there are legitimate criticisms to be made about McCain or legit criticisms to be made without calling him a Muslim. However, after Obama's speech yesterday I haven't really seen this tenacious, Swift Boat-esque continuation of any kind of attack; it's on Huffington Post and Daily Kos, but I'm a liberal and realize they're just blog smears. Obama's set the tone and hopefully the overwhelming majority of his supporters will follow, which seems to be happening.

    I still don't get, however, why Obama can come out two hours after the story breaks and say it's off-limits while you haven't seen McCain get up and make a similar statement this entire campaign about the viral smears regarding Obama.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    I believe that this is a family matter and should not reflect on how Sarah Palin performs her job but it does raise some questions. First if the McCain campaign knew about this then why not disclose this information up front. It was bound to get out eventually so why not beat the press to it and prevent the public from thinking that they where trying to hide this information. Second, if the McCain campaign did not know about this then what does that say about their vetting process. What other skeletons does this woman have in her closet. Either way I don't think it should reflect poorly on Palin but in my eyes it definitely reflects poorly on McCain. No matter what the Republican [arty says a lot of their core conservative supporters will probably be put off by this and even though Obama has come out and said that this is not an issue and that people shouold respect the Palin family's privacy that doesn't mean that the press will. They will call Palin's judgement into question for putting her daughter through this and McCain's judgement for selecting a VP with this family issue.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • meistereder
    meistereder Posts: 1,577
    The daughter's life, details of the pregnancy, etc.: Off-limits

    Palin's stance on sex education (abstinence-only): Very much within the limits.

    Obviously, the media should leave the girl alone. She should not be the next Britney Spears or whatever. This debate is not about the girl. It's about whether Palin's sex education policy works or not. (It doesn't).
    San Diego 10/25/00, Mountain View 6/1/03, Santa Barbara 10/28/03, Northwest School 3/18/05, San Diego 7/7/06, Los Angeles 7/9/06, 7/10/06, Honolulu (U2) 12/9/06, Santa Barbara (EV) 4/10/08, Los Angeles (EV) 4/12/08, Hartford 6/27/08, Mansfield 6/28/08, VH1 Rock Honors The Who 7/12/08, Seattle 9/21/09, Universal City 9/30/09, 10/1/09, 10/6/09, 10/7/09, San Diego 10/9/09, Los Angeles (EV) 7/8/11, Santa Barbara (EV) 7/9/11, Chicago 7/19/13, San Diego 11/21/13, Los Angeles 11/23/13, 11/24/13, Oakland 11/26/13, Chicago 8/22/16, Missoula 8/13/18, Boston 9/2/18, Los Angeles 2/25/22 (EV), San Diego 5/3/22, Los Angeles 5/6/22, 5/7/22, Imola 6/25/22, Los Angeles 5/21/24, [London 6/29/24], [Boston 9/15/24]
  • Skitch Patterson
    Skitch Patterson Posts: 642
    digster wrote:

    I still don't get, however, why Obama can come out two hours after the story breaks and say it's off-limits while you haven't seen McCain get up and make a similar statement this entire campaign about the viral smears regarding Obama.

    Real easy.. because it hits close to home. If people chose to attack Bristol (and sarah) Palin over this, they are, by extension attacking the choices Baracks mother made in being an 18 year old single mother. Its like making a "retard" joke in front of a person with a mentally handicapped sibling.

    Another point.. The only reason this was made into news was because it was the only way to put to rest the whole stupid internet rumors that Sarah Palins youngest son is actually her daughters. The extreme liberal internet media and blogs had jumped all over this, and the uncertainty of that likely would have been far more damaging than a teen who made the same bad decision thousands do every year.
  • digster
    digster Posts: 1,293
    Skitch Patterson wrote:
    Real easy.. because it hits close to home. If people chose to attack Bristol (and sarah) Palin over this, they are, by extension attacking the choices Baracks mother made in being an 18 year old single mother. Its like making a "retard" joke in front of a person with a mentally handicapped sibling.

    Maybe, but it seems much more likely that Obama was practicing the kind of politics he's been preaching (that McCain has been preaching as well). It's one thing to say you're trying to be above the fray, but it's another to actually address the divisive issue at hand. With the Republicans, there have been smear campaigns that Obama is a Muslim (and that the Republicans have used that as a smear campaign is racist in itself, but I digress), that he's a terrorist and went to a madrassa, that he hates America, that his wife hates America. All of this is false, but thus far McCain hasn't said a word about it; why? Why not admonish his supporters who use these techniques, as Obama did yesterday to his? If McCain truly is about a 'new kind of politics' he hasn't shown it so far.
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    very irrelevant. I cant believe dems would actually even bring this up.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    spyguy wrote:
    very irrelevant. I cant believe dems would actually even bring this up.

    It should be bought up because there are questions that need to be asked about McCain. If he knew why not disclose the info earlier to prew\vent it getting out the way it did. Now it just seems as if they where trying to hide this information. If he didn't know then you have to question his vetting process. Also why would a parent but their daughter through this. I know that if my teenage daughter was pregnant I sure as hell would accept the VP nod. The scrutiny that comes with that position would only result in my pregnant daughter being put in the spot light. Being pregnant at that age has to be hard enough never mind all the media attention heaped on top of it.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • spyguy
    spyguy Posts: 613
    mammasan wrote:
    It should be bought up because there are questions that need to be asked about McCain. If he knew why not disclose the info earlier to prew\vent it getting out the way it did. Now it just seems as if they where trying to hide this information. If he didn't know then you have to question his vetting process. Also why would a parent but their daughter through this. I know that if my teenage daughter was pregnant I sure as hell would accept the VP nod. The scrutiny that comes with that position would only result in my pregnant daughter being put in the spot light. Being pregnant at that age has to be hard enough never mind all the media attention heaped on top of it.

    it doesnt need to be disclosed because its nobody's business. secondly, mccain is not "trying to hide it"
  • Skitch Patterson
    Skitch Patterson Posts: 642
    digster wrote:
    Maybe, but it seems much more likely that Obama was practicing the kind of politics he's been preaching (that McCain has been preaching as well). It's one thing to say you're trying to be above the fray, but it's another to actually address the divisive issue at hand. With the Republicans, there have been smear campaigns that Obama is a Muslim (and that the Republicans have used that as a smear campaign is racist in itself, but I digress), that he's a terrorist and went to a madrassa, that he hates America, that his wife hates America. All of this is false, but thus far McCain hasn't said a word about it; why? Why not admonish his supporters who use these techniques, as Obama did yesterday to his? If McCain truly is about a 'new kind of politics' he hasn't shown it so far.


    Eh. I think you're giving Obama too much credit- and not enough credit at the same time. Did you see the video? There seemed to be a definite raw emotion to what he was saying- it obviously hit him close to home- i respect that. However, i dont think he did it just to practice the politics he's preaching. I think it was coming from a very honest non-manipulative place. If he was just trying to do that- he would have left it at "I dont think thats fair to discuss" or ignored it all together.

    The McCain comparison doesnt really seem valid to me.. as Its not like Obama spoke out about the whole "Sarah Palin is really the GRANDMOTHER" nonsense.. he didnt say a word until the legitimate story came out. Neither he, nor mccain have denounced the absolute nonsense innuendo that is bound to be bandied about between now and november... and they shouldnt... that would just give it credability.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    spyguy wrote:
    it doesnt need to be disclosed because its nobody's business. secondly, mccain is not "trying to hide it"

    It is no bodies business but in this day and age the media scrutinizes every aspect of our politicians personal lives. This poor girl is going through enough being so young and pregnant so I would question Palin judgement for putting her daughter through this or are they so niave in Alaska that she didn't think the media wouldn't feast on this.

    I also don't think that McCain tried to hide it, in fact I'm willing to bet that McCain didn't even know about it which calls into question his ability as well. Regardless of how we feel, this is a potentially damaging revelation. Why select someone with this type of baggage to be your VP.

    They could have easily made this information known from day 1. By not doing so it just seems that they where trying to keep this out of the public eye. Their intentions are irrevelent because in the end it comes down to what the public perseives
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • Strangest Tribe
    Strangest Tribe Posts: 2,502
    McCain made a poor VP selection. This was true before the National news ran with the pregnancy story...

    This issue just makes it more laughable. It doesn't make McCain look very smart.

    But then again what does intelligence have to do with being a conservative?
    the Minions
  • Solat13
    Solat13 Posts: 6,996
    mammasan wrote:
    It is no bodies business but in this day and age the media scrutinizes every aspect of our politicians personal lives. This poor girl is going through enough being so young and pregnant so I would question Palin judgement for putting her daughter through this or are they so niave in Alaska that she didn't think the media wouldn't feast on this.

    I also don't think that McCain tried to hide it, in fact I'm willing to bet that McCain didn't even know about it which calls into question his ability as well. Regardless of how we feel, this is a potentially damaging revelation. Why select someone with this type of baggage to be your VP.

    They could have easily made this information known from day 1. By not doing so it just seems that they where trying to keep this out of the public eye. Their intentions are irrevelent because in the end it comes down to what the public perseives

    The thing is they didn't try and hide it. They just didn't publicize it as its no one's business. Everyone in their home town knew Bristol was pregnant.

    http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1837862,00.html?xid=rss-topstories
    - Busted down the pretext
    - 8/28/98
    - 9/2/00
    - 4/28/03, 5/3/03, 7/3/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 7/12/03, 7/14/03
    - 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/1/04, 10/2/04
    - 9/11/05, 9/12/05, 9/13/05, 9/30/05, 10/1/05, 10/3/05
    - 5/12/06, 5/13/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 6/23/06, 7/22/06, 7/23/06, 12/2/06, 12/9/06
    - 8/2/07, 8/5/07
    - 6/19/08, 6/20/08, 6/22/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08, 6/27/08, 6/28/08, 6/30/08, 7/1/08
    - 8/23/09, 8/24/09, 9/21/09, 9/22/09, 10/27/09, 10/28/09, 10/30/09, 10/31/09
    - 5/15/10, 5/17/10, 5/18/10, 5/20/10, 5/21/10, 10/23/10, 10/24/10
    - 9/11/11, 9/12/11
    - 10/18/13, 10/21/13, 10/22/13, 11/30/13, 12/4/13
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    Solat13 wrote:
    The thing is they didn't try and hide it. They just didn't publicize it as its no one's business. Everyone in their home town knew Bristol was pregnant.

    http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1837862,00.html?xid=rss-topstories

    That is just splitting hairs. The nation at large had no idea and if it was public knowledge back in Alaska then why not just come out and say it up front. Again it's about public perception. I personally believe, or would like to believe, that they didn't mention this from day one was to respect Bristol's privacy. That doesn't mean that other's will see it that way and in an election public perception is everything. If 3 days after you annouce you VP pick all this info is starting to leak it just looks bad. If they would have stated this on Friday there still would have been the media coverage and McCain detracters would have still brought this up in a negative light but the illusion of deception would not have existed. Notice not many people are questioning Palin's ability to be our VP because her daughter is pregnat. Most are talking about why this wasn't disclosed up front. They could have avoided all of this by just being forth coming. Now all their exuses just look like political spin.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul

Categories