Well, you’re right - but only in the sense that this is a positive thing taken as a whole and not a negative.
Until McCain publicly apologizes and atones for his joke about Chelsea Clinton, I feel that every child of a Republican candidate is fair game for anything.
You really don’t see the irony? You didn’t comment on Al Gore’s huge estate and private jet while he lectured the nation on energy conservation? Huh, color me surprised.
Plus Al Gore’s son’s speeding ticket (90 mph in a Prius, whoda thunk it?) and Howard Dean’s son’s booze theft are common knowledge, right? You didn’t acquire this information by some arcane process, it was published in the papers and on the 24 hour news cycle. You heard it, I heard it, all America heard it.
If Sarah Palin had not made such a big deal out of it nobody else would have. And you still avoid demonstrating any harsh treatment of Bristol, the point of this whole thread.
He did publicly apologize. He apologized to the Clintons and the media carried the story - while not printing the joke as a general rule.
You can look up what I said about that story. To save you the trouble, I said it was no big deal.
I seem to recall a fair amount of ink and excitement over Jenna Bush and her sister having some issues a few campaigns ago.
I really think this is it. That, and somewhere along the way we lost the idea that members of the other political party could still be treated with respect and dignity. The name of the game is making your opponent look as bad as possible, and anything’s fair game. Thus, we heard a lot more about Bill Clinton’s sexual indiscretions than about John F. Kennedy’s, for example.
Like I said in one of the other threads, the whole point of putting Palin on the ticket was to get the attention of the press. A more boring pick like Pawlenty would have brought a collective yawn as the press went back to talking about how great Obama’s speech was. Instead, they spent the weekend getting to know Palin, her record, and her family in great detail.
And then, 72 hours later, with the eyes of the press still focused on her, they announce that her 17-year-old unmarried daughter is pregnant. It was going to be a big deal regardless of her party, and it got more play than it could have because Gustav (thankfully) turned out to be pretty dull.
I haven’t seen Obama or any of his surrogates attack either Sarah or Bristol over it. I’ve seen a lot of schadenfreude on the blogs, and I’m not crazy about it, just because I’ve known plenty of evangelical, anti-comprehensive-sex-ed parents who nonetheless had very open and honest attitudes about sex with their teenage kids. They’re a small minority, but they exist, and for all I know the Palins have that sort of relationship.
It’s certainly no worse than the response would have been if Obama had a 17-year-old daughter turn up pregnant. But if it is amplified, it’s because it was part of Palin’s coming out party.
The obvious issue is that this case would appear to represent a failure of the Religious Right’s abstinence-only approach to sex education. (We can only say “appears”, since we can only presume that Palin has in fact been practicing what she preaches in this regard.)
The buried subtext is that this abstinence-only approach arises from an opposition to birth control as well as to abortion.
On a political metagame level, it’s the result of throwing rules out the window. The situation resembles the scene in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid where Butch, pressed into a fight, asks what rules will be in effect. His opponent sneeringly declares “No rules” – so Butch immediately kicks him in the balls.
See above. If Gore or Dean proposed any particular policy, the failure of which leads to DUI or theft, I must have missed it.
Harsh treatment? ***Harsh treatment?? ***She’s the darling of the republican party! They’re practically hoisting her up on their shoulders and parading her around the convention hall!
I haven’t heard a single harsh word uttered against this kid, and that’s the way it should be.
I think there isn’t that much flack directed at Bristol.
I think that politics have become nastier in the last twenty years, and the motivating factors behind that change are largely on the Republican side.
I think that there’s a perceived hypocrisy when a Republican has a family scandal that just isn’t there for the Democrats, since the Republican party strives to paint itself as the sinless organization that wants to save all our souls.
So, to sum up - I don’t think she’s getting hit hard, and whatever flack she’s reaped, was sown by her mother’s party.
Repubs know better. They are running on the basis of having a better idea about education, sex education, birth control and abstinence. The fact that they say it so often makes them vulnerable when normal life intrudes. No one really stays up nights worrying about Britsol. We just enjoy that life penetrates the little bubble that the repubs blew up around them. They live in gated ,safe mental communities . Raging hormones broke in. Life wins again. I am sure she can crank out as many children or more than her mother. She is starting young.
I didn’t hear the joke. What did he say?
Again, awaiting cite that Gore or Dean wished to impose a public policy that would impel the use of their methods, and no others, to prevent teenagers from driving under the influence or stealing booze.
Irrelevant, Steve MB. The claim was that this incident is somehow evidence that Sarah Palin’s views on abstinence is wrongheaded. In fact, your exact words were that “this case would appear to represent a failure of the Religious Right’s abstinence-only approach to sex education.” It doesn’t – not by any stretch of logic. Even with your disclaimer that this “appears” to present such a failure, that conclusion simply does not follow.
Whether Gore, Dean, or Palin wish to impose such public policies or not is simply irrelevant. If this incident does not reasonably demonstrate that her stance is wrongheaded – and it doesn’t, for the reasons that I’ve outlined at length – then all this talk about imposing public policy is nothing but a red herring.
Instead of talking about Brisol Palin - because what can be said other than “what an unfortunate circumstance, I’m happy she has the support of her family and wish her the best” - lets talk about the reality of public life.
The reality of public life is that if you are Rumor Willis and you go out partying in an ugly dress, someone makes a blog post about it because your parents are famous. http://gofugyourself.celebuzz.com/go_fug_yourself/cat_731/
If you are unfortunate enough to be Suri Cruise, people wonder why your parents don’t take you out in public all the time. If you are the children of Pitt and Jolie, they write articles about the circumstances of your conception. If you are Chelsea Clinton, they call you a dog, if you are Barbara and Jenna Bush, your partying with the secret service becomes a press item.
You become fair game for everyone who has nothing better to do with their time than gossip about people they don’t know (disclaimer, I have a go fug yourself addiction - I need to write a cron job so the site pops up every day for me at 3:00 - but it would be embarrassing while I’m sharing my screen in meetings - I’m one of the people who has nothing better to do with my time - but Jessica does such a snide job of saying “what in the hell is Posh wearing for a skirt!” I can’t resist).
This is the double edge sword of free speech - we are free to comment on the lives of others. And about the manners we have developed where we don’t only feel its our right, but our obligation to judge others. We do it to our own friends and relatives - and we’ll do it to Jamie Lynn Spears even faster because most of us don’t know her.
That doesn’t require a great liberal media conspiracy - its human nature - not the most pleasant part of it perhaps, but it is what we are.
At a Republican function, he said, IIRC, “Do you know why Chelsea is so ugly? Her father is Janet Reno.” So not only did he attack a 13 year old girl whose only sin was being the daughter of the President, but he also worked in a slam on lesbians as well. Totally uncalled for, and an apology is not sufficient atonement for me. It may be for others who are more forgiving, but I am petty that way. And I hate the Clintons!
I’m more than happy to consider Bristol’s pregnancy to be a personal, private matter, off limits to anyone who wishes to stick their noses into it (except her parents, since she is a minor.)
In fact, I will make a deal with Sarah Palin. I will agree not to stick my nose into her teenage daughter’s pregnancy, if she will agree not to stick her nose (via the government) into my (hypothetical) teenage daughter’s pregnancy. Deal? Huh. Didn’t think so.
Jesus, what an asshole! Yeah, unforgiveable. Fucker.
One week ago today (Thursday, August 28) very few people in the contiguous 48 knew who Sarah Palin was beyond, perhaps, “attractive governor of Alaska”. The next day she’s the most talked about woman in the country. ANYTHING that fleshes her out is going to lead.
The whole Bristol thing has only been going on for less than a week, and it’s because her mother’s being vetted by the whole nation, Plus there’s some oddity there (she’s out of school five months for mono? Which her boyfriend who was having sex with her during that time somehow didn’t contract? And frankly her pregnancy is newsworthy [note: newsworthy and campaign issue are two different things] due to her mom’s views on abstinence only/cutting funds for teen mothers/etc…
None of it will last. By this time next week Bristol will have largely faded from print as we have more things to base opinions of Palin on, whether pro or anti, and Bristol can go back to doing whatever it is she does in private (in fact now that her parents are going to be out of town for at least two months she’ll probably really rock the place).
Hijack: my favorite description of Palin thus far comes from another message board- “a demented Peggy Hill”. I can totally see her saying “Team… Sarah Palin!” at any or no opportunities.