Because...?

Yeah, what are you saying? He did or did not know?

I think it's not possible that she could have surprised him with this. If she had, we'd have heard a lonely, mournful cry of pain from the cavernous depths of Earth's Republican soul... I've heard no such wail.

What if it turned out that McCain was, y'know, crafty?

Again, this may well increase her popularity. Did you ever *really* know a family that never had this problem? Even for a weekend?

(PS- Some of us are looking forward to your next post on abortion. )

Aw, c'mon, give them the benefit of the doubt.. For some two weeks period before election, just pretend that:

- They're essentially sincere.

- The don't hate sex, they hate the consequences of doing it wrong.

- They really really believe that those are little babies, and are hence being murdered.

- They sincerely like the fact that this family is making the sacrifices to take care of Bristol's child, and is pleased that the child's father is (apparently/maybe/whatever) going to try to live up to the responsibilities.

No foolin', Amy... If Jerry Falwell comes back from the dead, listen to him quietly for two weeks. I promise you won't turn into a zombie!

What if it turned out that McCain was, y'know, crafty?

But how could that be, Crid? He's just a crazy old man. He don't know nuthin' 'bout no campaignin'.

Here's the thing about the Bristol pregnancy: One of the toughest balancing act for the Republicans in recent memory has been straddling their appeal to the base, which is strongly anti-abortion, and independent voters, who tend to be more moderate on the issue. Many of the candidates for VP who otherwise would have been very appealing were out for McCain because of the pro-life issue.

Now, however, McCain is running with a woman who didn't abort a Downs Syndrome baby and whose pregnant teenager is keeping the baby and getting married. She's living the anti-abortion doctrine. McCain and Palin don't need to say one single word more about abortion for the next nine weeks to convince the pro-lifers that they're on their side. Not one word. Which means they won't be rubbing in the face of independent voters that they're in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade. Of course the campaign doesn't want to give details on the issue - they've pulled off a masterstroke and they don't want to admit why they've done what they've done.

Man, I knewhe should've tapped Powell. o_O

This may actually work for the Repubs because it is such an unusual circumstance for teen pregnancies. The father is a bo-hunk who is living in a great economy (Alaskan Oil), is planning on marrying, and can probably walk into a high paying oil field job. Bristol has an extended family and apparent desire to create a family.

It's a conservative wet-dream, but really bears almost no reflection to the common problems associated with teen pregnancy.

I do wonder what the reaction would have been if Bristol happened to be Obama \ Michelle's daughter...

Why is Bristol's pregnancy even an issue, last time I checked, her name wasn't on the ticket.

This is why I can't stand politics. Bill Clinton regularly walked around the Oval Office with his pants around his ankles, and that was okay per the liberals.

After all, it was a "personal matter" if I remember correctly.

Nicole Wallace absolutely smacked Katie Couric around (like a cat playing with a mouse) in an interview last night.

Admittedly, I read very few liberal blogs. However, Nicole mentioned that absolutely disgusting, vile, and hateful (not verbatim) personal attacks against the Palin's on liberal blogs.

Couric made the stupid mistake of trying to defend yet another baseless, hypocritical liberal position, and Nicole's response was to slap her silly.

What Nicole said in the interview only confirmed what Amy and others have said on this blog regarding the disgusting display of "debate skills" exhibited on liberal blog sites.

Someone please answer the following. If according to liberals it "wasn't an issue" when Bill Clinton walked around the oval office with his penis exposed, then why is
Bristol's pregnancy an issue? Remember, they're both "personal matters."

I think the GOP Ticket should be Palin and Wallace respectively.

Meanwhile, we're supposed to think she can help run this country while she apparently doesn't even have much control over her own household?

Sigh. I don't think I am bothering to vote this year.

Wow, you are a grandmother, aren't you?

Suddenly I want pie...

>> Why is Bristol's pregnancy even an issue...

I don't think Bristol's particular life should be an issue, but the Republicans have run throughout my lifetime as the "family values" party. They want to hoist their own agenda onto the citizens (just as all political parties do), and in this election where the winner will likely choose who will replace the remaining "liberal" Supreme Court Justices, issues such as Rov v Wade, gay marriage and school prayer will likely be challenged and back on the docket.

Palin believes abortion should not be allowed in ANY case. Rape, incest, it does not matter. I find it hard to even imagine a woman who has been raped, or a woman finding out her child has Tay-Sachs, being forced to bring the child to term because Bush/Palin/Mccain know what best.

And don't kid yourself if you believe McCain / Palin want to stop at Roe V Wade. Check out johnmccain.com. The states rights are at risk right after Roe v Wade.

Personally, I do not admire a woman for bringing into the world a child with Down's syndrome. I don't condemn her for it either. I view it as her personal choice, and a family matter. Palin however does not respect that a woman should be able to sort out that matter for herself, and Palin feels that the government should have the only voice in this decision process.

So it is a personal liberties issue.

You shouldn't accuse politicians of storm-trooper authoritarianism when you'll cluck at a pregnant woman who chooses to give birth.

Meanwhile, we're supposed to think she can help run this country while she apparently doesn't even have much control over her own household?

Sigh. I don't think I am bothering to vote this year.

Posted by: T's Grammy at September 2, 2008 11:35 AM

What does her teenage daughters pregnancy have to do with controlling her own household?

Does her daughter not have the free will to make her own decisions?

Do parents who have counseled their children not to drink, smoke, or do drugs not have any control of their households if their kids "choose" to drink, smoke or do drugs?

Are you implying that kids (and more specifically teenagers) always do what their parents tell them? Do they always listen to their parents advice?

I'm sorry, but that was an exceedingly ignorant comment. To assume that a parent has no control over this household because their kids "choose" not to listen to them is ludicrous at best.

I think it's best that you refrain from voting IMHO, considering that logic.

>> You shouldn't accuse politicians of storm-trooper authoritarianism...

I don't have to accuse them of anything. Here is the link to John Mccain's website I mentioned:

http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/95b18512-d5b6-456e-90a2-12028d71df58.htm

an excerpt:

However, the reversal of Roe v. Wade represents only one step in the long path toward ending abortion. Once the question is returned to the states, the fight for life will be one of courage and compassion - the courage of a pregnant mother to bring her child into the world and the compassion of civil society to meet her needs and those of her newborn baby. The pro-life movement has done tremendous work in building and reinforcing the infrastructure of civil society by strengthening faith-based, community, and neighborhood organizations that provide critical services to pregnant mothers in need. This work must continue and government must find new ways to empower and strengthen these armies of compassion.

And I didn't "cluck" at Pali's choice. I am just saying her choice doesn't need to be every woman's choice.

Hmm. I'm glad to see somebody besides me asking for consistency across parties - in observations of behavior.

I wonder: Where is the dignity and responsibility of the "left" in this scene?

Most of the people arrested were "self described anarchists". They belong to the extreme right. You know, no federal government.

All this lumping of left and right is meaningless.

Eric - If it were Obama's daughter, we'd be asking "so, where's the father going to be doing time", as both of his daughters are quite under age.

And, quite frankly, I don't get where we came up with this idea that a 17 year old is a "child". In just about every other culture in the world, Bristol would be considered an adult.

Frankly, I'm sickened not only by the crass intrusion into the private lives of the children of the candidates, but by the coordinated lie-campaign that is being waged on Obama's behalf by his most rabid supporters.

I think at this point, I'm going to ignore all political coverage through election day. If it isn't related directly to football or baseball, then I don't even want to read it.

Most of the people arrested were "self described anarchists". They belong to the extreme right. You know, no federal government.

All this lumping of left and right is meaningless.

Posted by: Eric at September 2, 2008 3:30 PM

Eric, I don't know if they are right or left. Quite honestly, I presumed left, considering they are interrupting the RNC.

Why would right wing extremists interrupt the RNC?

> reversal of Roe v. Wade represents
> only one step in the long path
> toward ending abortion

That's correct, Eric. Make no mistake about this: McCain and many other conservatives want to end abortion. Many of them think it's murder.

(I think all sane people think abortion's tragic. How many fucks are there out there that good people would pursue if they knew, KNEW, that abortion would follow, whatever the interval?)

For the record, Clinton made it clear that he opposes abortion, too. In 1992 he said is should be "safe, legal and rare." Nothing happened, which was what he wanted. The line was so good and meaningless that it stayed in the Democratic platform until recently. Last Thursday, Obama said "[S]urely we can agree on reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies in this country." That was a magnificent backtrack, just fucking brilliant. He didn't even pretend there was middle ground. It left not so much as a memo to be written. (And don't call me Shirley.)

Don't pretend to panic about this, as if it's a moral issue demanding our best courage and most thoughtful effort. If pro-abortion people felt that way about it, they'd have done what was necessary to pass an amendment describing what was to be permitted when I was 13 years old. Instead, they let the courts do it in the most cowardly, clumsy, irresponsible way imaginable. (See also, 'gay marriage'.)

Thirty-five years of having weasel lefties jumping at me from behind the bushes (so to speak) every four years to shout Boo! is enough. If the Supreme Court outlaws abortion (and it won't), it's because the left deserves for it to happen.

Dog-whistle politics is for SHITHEELS. This is precisely the sort of crazyness that's mangled our relations with the entire continent of South America... Which, given our policies, Americans might presume to be an enormous coca plantation.

> considering they are
> interrupting the RNC.

Yeah. There's that.

(PS- Hey Amy: Do you really think McCain didn't know about Bristol?)

"Most of the people arrested were "self described anarchists". They belong to the extreme right. You know, no federal government."

Oh, right - which is why they appeared in such huge numbers at the DNC. Not.

Eric, maybe I should have been more forthcoming with my previous question. Where's your proof that Republican Extremists AKA "self described anarchists", disrupted their own parties convention?

I guess I should have been more specific. Yes, teenagers are going to disregard parental rules sometimes. But let's not forget that she wants to inflict her rules -- that didn't even work on her own child -- on our children. How's it make any sense to give that power to her? My point was more to the fact that she couldn't even influence her own daughter's actions.

I'm not an Obama supporter. He's long since lost his charm with me.

Eric, great points in your first post!

And, Crid, yes, I really am a grandmother! Though I wouldn't be if I had it to do all over again. ;) Oh, well. Life's not a do-over.

Who vetted Sarah Palin?
Clearly a blunder. What a lovely selection of candidates this year. Maybe I'll write Amy Alkon in as my choice.