topaz

Thank you, sir.

As I said in my journal, I haven't seen such an outpouring of misogynistic fervor since... um... since... um.

Yeah.

Message to the social left: Hey, folks, can we at least try to win this one on the merits? Or at least pretend to be doing so? Holy crap.

From:

muckefuck.livejournal.com

Since the campaign for the Democratic nomination?

From:

Since, um, yep.

Irony may not be dead, but they're calling the code right now over the PA.

From:

browngirl.livejournal.com

Oh, people. *facxepalm* I can't believe -- well, I wish I couldn't -- they're saying something so ridiculous.

From:

reesei.livejournal.com

You know, a web site that gets the gender of the child incorrect has more wrong with it than conspiracy theories... A good conspiracy theory has to hew to reality enough to keep it from being completely whacko.

There's enough to criticize Palin on without going to insane lengths.

From:

Oh god. I totally lose points for not catching that. (I even stopped to say, "wait, Trig is a daughter?" and checked the story again. Should have triple-checked against a reliable source.)

From:

cdevers.livejournal.com

Turns out that Trig wasn't Bristol's daughter. Bristol's daughter will be in another 4 months from now, give or take. The shotgun wedding will presumably be at some point between now and then, more more specifically, between now and election day.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/palin-confirms-daughters-pregnancy-915378.html

From:

...which means the original surmise that drove the original DKos post was at least partially right, which means this wasn't total moonbattery.

From:

...which further points out that the vetting on this pick was pretty insanely bad.

From:

dbang.livejournal.com

McCain's gang says he knew before she was picked.

From:

They couldn't possibly say anything else. To say that they didn't know would be tacitly admitting that they didn't even bother to vet her, and who would admit to that even if it's true?

I thought Sullivan was bonkers for suggesting that she may end up not being the veep who ultimately makes it on to the ticket, but now I'm not so sure. This is one race where it wouldn't be implausible for her to withdraw in order to "spend more time with her family."

From:

dbang.livejournal.com

I was wondering the same thing. A "throwaway" pick?

From:

So, get the base excited then make them settle for Romney or something?

I'm not seeing the strategy this little theory requires.

From:

dbang.livejournal.com

to the contrary, get the moderates going "oh gods, no...." and after that, anyone will look like a relief.

From:

Well, with a nod of respect, I am going to file that theory under my "rejected by Occam" label.

Stupidity, hastiness, or "she's got appeal that exceeds the negatives and they knew it" are my current leading trio.

From:

sirreality.livejournal.com

Ah. The "Harriet Miers" gambit.

From:

That would be the precedent.

From:

If McCain picked a woman VP then rejects her and picks a man, that certainly wouldn't woo the Clinton die-hards.

From:

I think she was a tantrum pick. I would not be surprised if McCain chose her in a fit of pique -- over the he-has-eight-houses stories, maybe. She's probably as un-eight-houses as a GOP governor gets.

Edited Date: 2008-09-02 12:04 am (UTC)

From:

beowabbit

I thought Sullivan was bonkers for suggesting that she may end up not being the veep who ultimately makes it on to the ticket, but now I'm not so sure. This is one race where it wouldn't be implausible for her to withdraw in order to "spend more time with her family."

When her name first came out, somebody on DKos commented saying (roughly) “Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Senator Eagleton!”

From:

They couldn't possibly say anything else. To say that they didn't know would be tacitly admitting that they didn't even bother to vet her, and who would admit to that even if it's true?

One point in favor of its being true: Bristol was wearing an engagement ring (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Palin_family.jpg) at the announcement. That seems pretty open if Gov. Palin (or Bristol) were trying to keep the situation secret from McCain's staff or the press. It also fits that (assuming they didn't want or didn't think they could keep it secret) they'd want it out as early as possible. But we'll see how it plays out.

From:

For the love of God, people, can we drop this nonsense about how maybe Trig Palin is really Sarah Palin's granddaughter?

Leaving everything else aside, there's the minor point that Trig Palin isn't anyone's granddaughter. :-)

From:

reesei.livejournal.com

What I really, really want to see - but I know I never will - is a forthright discussions of conditions for working moms from someone who will be one of the most prominent working moms in the country, no matter who wins the election.

Is her husband going to quit his job to provide childcare for the 5 kids while she campaigns? Will we have one of the first really high-profile stay-at-home dads to provide an example for the country?

If not, is she paying for full-time childcare? Will she make it a platform to provide safe and affordable childcare for other working moms who don't have her connections or income?

Is she breastfeeding or pumping - if so, will she make it a platform that other working moms should have the same access that she does to safe locations to feed or to pump and store?

She is choosing to make her children a platform - so let's open up a dialog about family values in the context of high-profile, high-stress jobs. And yes, I do believe that being a high-profile woman in a male-dominated field does lead to these sorts of questions, and that this isn't a bad thing. You could see her as leading by example on these issues - so let's see what her example is.

If she uses this opportunity to really open up a discussion about work-life balance, this could be a great thing for the country.

But if she's going to campaign on how her example proves you don't need birth control or abortion, but doesn't discuss what the trade-offs are... then I lose a lot of respect for her.

I also have no patience for "you wouldn't ask a man these questions". When you campaign on how you're going to capitalize on "18-million cracks in the glass ceiling", you get to handle questions about how you'll handle that ceiling yourself.

From:

sconstant.livejournal.com

I thought about this a lot too, especially since it was so trumpeted that she was back to work 3 days after giving birth. I wanted to hear more about that - her choice? how did she do it? what sacrifices? how does she feel about it? etc.

From:

Is her husband going to quit his job to provide childcare for the 5 kids while she campaigns?

He seems to have already done that (http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/story/8924080p-8824177c.html) when she became governor:

Until recently, he earned hourly wages as a production operator in a BP-run facility that separates oil from gas and water. Palin was making between $100,000 and $120,000 a year before he went on leave in December to make more time for his family and avoid potential conflicts of interest.

...

"...There are lots of things I would never want to take away from him, but this is something he's enthused about."

Those things include taking care of their four kids and escaping into the Alaska wilderness to fish commercially, hunt or train for the Tesoro Iron Dog, billed as the longest, toughest snowmobile race in the world. The Palins have a son, Track, 18, and three daughters, Bristol, 16, Willow, 12, and Piper, 6.

...

At home, Palin takes care of the cooking, the bills and other domestic paperwork, in addition to driving the kids to extracurricular activities like basketball and soccer, according to his wife. He divides much of his time between Wasilla, where Track is recovering from shoulder surgery, and the capital in Juneau, where the Palin daughters are in school.

"He can go on just an hour or two of sleep a night. He says, 'I can sleep when I die,' " said Sarah Palin. "There is no way I could have done this job without his tremendous contributions to the home life. He's able to keep it organized, like a well-oiled machine."

Irrelevant to the issue, but an interesting bit of trivia: Todd Palin is a quarter Yu'pik. (I don't know if that locks up the critical Eskimo vote or not. :-) )

But if she's going to campaign on how her example proves you don't need birth control or abortion

She's opposed to abortion, but pro-contraception (http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/governor06/story/8049298p-7942233c.html).

From:

reesei.livejournal.com

She's opposed to abortion, but pro-contraception.

She can't be that pro-contraception if she has said she will not allow sex-ed classes (much harsher wording than simply preferring abstinence). Or is one allowed contraception, but not training in how to use it? Contraception - but only after marriage?

Does that make her pro-contraception-choice?

*blink*

Thanks for the info on the childcare issue, by the way. Interesting reading.

From:

The only thing I can find for Palin on sex-ed is a one-sentence answer from a candidate questionnaire (http://eagleforumalaska.blogspot.com/2006/07/2006-gubernatorial-candidate.html):

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.

Unless there's somewhere that "explicit sex-ed programs" is clarified, or where she actually acted on legislation on the subject, this doesn't really tell us much about what, if any, sex-ed she considers appropriate. "Explicit" may only denotate "clear and detailed", but the word's connotations are close enough to "porn in the classroom"-- probably intentionally, given that the questionnaire came from the Eagle Forum-- that I suspect most politicians would steer clear of it in anyplace remotely conservative.

From:

If not, is she paying for full-time childcare?

This interview (http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20222685,00.html) at least implies that they're relying on family (including extended family) rather than paid child care.

Is she breastfeeding or pumping

At least some of the latter: "Gov. Palin, who is still nursing her son, tells PEOPLE she’s used to multi-tasking: 'What I've had to do, though, is in the middle of the night, put down the Blackberries and pick up the breast pump. Do a couple of things different and still get it all done.'"

From:

awfief.livejournal.com

++

And honestly -- I would ask a man these questions, if his wife were a full-time worker. In fact, my own brother and his wife just had their 4th child, and I have a lot of respect for them. They have had their children while taking time off from education (she's an M.D. and just finished up a residency, and is taking time off between that and her next step to spend a year or so with her new daughter), and with lots of help and support from grandparents (support mostly in the form of childcare; it's only been this year, when their oldest child was 6-7 years old, that they have needed to hire someone for childcare and use preschool daycare).

Now, they also have a lot of resources, certainly not as much as Palin. I think it would be useful for Palin to discuss openly and honestly that while her family is nobody's business, she's living proof that you can raise a loving family while still having a 2-parent working household, and here's how we did it (with the idea that "if we did it so can you!" which, though not necessarily true, is the basis of the patriarch nature of the Republican party, and why so many people hurt by their politics still vote for them).

Discussing the importance of balancing a career and motherhood is definitely something I'd respect her for.

From:

alanj

Oh, come on.

Between the photos of Sarah, the photos of Bristol, Bristol being out of school with "mono" for a bizarrely long time, the seemingly insane decision to get on an eight-hour flight after contractions started... you can't tell me there's not some reasonable doubt there.

And between Palin's views on sex education (because abstinence-only programs "work"!) and the campaign proudly trotting out the decision not to abort Trig, you can't say it's not relevant.

From:

Even if it is true I don't thing it is harmful (except possibly to her daughter). A mother standing by her pro-life principles and sacrificing for her daughter could be appealing. It's a "white lie" with a built-in punishment, rather than hypocrisy.

Personally I don't care either way, except to hope the child was conceived in trigonometry class.

From:

alanj

See http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/08/privacy-and-pal.html for a good response to that.

From:

I'm not saying it should be off-limits because it is a private matter, I just don't think it would change anybody's mind about her.

From:

Recall that one of Dick Cheney's daughters is in a long-term relationship with another woman, something I'd think social conservatives would be against. That didn't seem to hurt the republican ticket.

From:

sconstant.livejournal.com

I was totally trying and failing to apply Occam's razor. On the one hand her advanced age (much harder to get pregnant), the mono, the traveling whilst in labor, the late announcement of the pregnancy, the photos of the daughter, the absence of photos of the mom looking pregnant. On the other hand her advanced age (much much more likely than a 16 year old to have a Down's kid), the fact that it would take so much orchestration. Neither side wins.

I failed so spectacularly in the application that I'm left having to believe one crazy side or another, which leaves me somehow still dubious about the current pregnancy. If the daughter's not pregnant, it's a great refutation of the story, and the kids can get married and raise the kid after the "miscarriage" which ends the current non-pregnancy. It's crazy, but no crazier than either thing I was considering before, and one of those had to have been true.

From:

keyne.livejournal.com

What she said.

From:

There were unquestionably some weird things going on there. But it just invites the question: are they more or less crazy than the idea that Palin orchestrated (and is still orchestrating!) a conspiracy to fool the press and public into thinking that she was pregnant for nine months? And I think the answer is clear: way, way, way less crazy.

The bit about getting on a plane after her water broke is also telling, but I think in the opposite way. If the whole pregnancy was a put-on in the first place, why on earth would she concoct such an odd and easily attacked reason for getting on a plane to come home? Why would her handlers not simply say "a family matter" or even "cut short for urgent state business"? It really strikes me as more plausible that the stated reason, while unusual, was the real deal.

From:

sconstant.livejournal.com

Yeah, except I think that even very smart people tell very stupid lies. Maybe bold is a better word.

But on the "it's not her kid" side of the razor the "Daughter is always holding New Baby, because it's hers" now has a looking-glass analogue in "Daughter is always holding New Baby to hide her own baby bump."

Oh, wait, your post was about how we're not supposed to be dignifying this. Dammit.

From:

alanj

It doesn't matter if something is easily attacked if no one is attacking her. She's a small-state governor with high ratings and friendly local press. Note that none of the rabid speculation dates back to the actual incident, only when McCain named her. There may have been whispers, but so what?

I can accept "more plausible", I can accept "less crazy", but "way way way less crazy" is a stretch. :P I'm with

sconstant, all the options seemed crazy and Occam's Razor was slashing all over the place.

From:

It just doesn't add up for me. The initial theory is way way out there in the first place, and while that doesn't make it impossible, it means I want to see some really good explanation to support it. So far everything that I've seen has been circumstantial hand-waving.

This story came out, presumably, because someone who knew about it leaked it. Why haven't any of the stories we've seen cited that source? Not even on deep background?

Here's what I think Occam's Razor tells us. Someone got wind that Palin's daughter is pregnant. After that story got told to a friend of a friend of a friend, it turned into the two rumors that hit the net: "Palin pretended to be pregnant to cover up her daughter's pregnancy" and "Palin is pregnant again."

That's all I see here. Honestly, my worst fear is that Palin will call the skeptics' bluff and tell her doctor to release her medical records. In minutes, it would turn the story into one about how the Democrats are losing it and grasping at straws. And isn't that all we need right now.

From:

alanj

Now that we know Bristol is currently pregnant, I think Occam's Razor gives us a pretty clear answer. Before that bit of information - yes, we're hiding something, but it's not that - it was a lot less clear.

As for sources, the initial posts I saw about the story were from random celebrity/gossip blogs. Sarah doesn't look pregnant, but Bristol does, huh, connect the dots. No sources, just looking at photos, the info about mono and flights came later.

From:

ABC News is reporting (http://thepage.time.com/2008/09/01/asked-and-not-answered/) that the McCain campaign dispatched a Vetting Squad to Alaska today.

Per George Stephanopoulos:

“They are sending a rapid response team of about 10 people that includes lawyers up to Alaska right now. They know there’s going to be an army of investigative reporters going up there, and they want to be ahead of it.”

“Some senior Republicans operatives outside the campaign say there’s no way they could have had a complete vetting with this kind of information coming out. Democrats say… the McCain campaign didn’t even go through Gov. Palin’s local newspapers.”

Note the dateline. Monday, September 1. This got underway today.

Wow.

From: