Ingrid

Shame? I don't get you, at all. Shame.. in this day and age.. and from you... aren't you changing your core beliefs to all of a sudden say that not only the daughter should feel shame but the mother, as well?

I've read enough of your posts to know how you feel about issues and politics.
This is a bad, bad, stretch.
And I don't for a minute think you would say this if it was happening to your preferred candidate.

Sheesh... I can not believe this!
Whether I like Palins political stances...which I do not, she should NOT be ashamed of her daughter.

Let me see if I got this straight...are you saying that you would feel shame if you had gotten pregnant at 17? Pity you, if that's so. Plus, this isn't at all the same as it was in your day. Thank cripes!
And I am thankful that she is a mother that loves her daughter, no matter what!

Honestly, OSH, you should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting that she is a bad mother. She should shield her from humiliation, public, or otherwise? Don't you really mean hide her, public or otherwise?

This is bad, really, really bad what women on this board have done to this woman.

Hey, I wouldn't vote for her... but I don't feel the need to knock her down... or her kids. Or her motherly skills.

I happen to think she is a wonderful mom to stand by her daughter.

Again, you should be ashamed of yourself. Honestly, I know you to be a thoughtful, passionate poster. But you've gone over the line, here.

And, sorry, I don't post here, often. And yet, tonight I posted to 2 threads. That those 2 threads (and my posts to those threads) are in response to you is in no way indicative of a personal objection to you.

Silly

I would never have put my daughter in the spotlight like that. And, despite her strong independent streak, evident from toddlerhood on, she needed me during that time. We were together a lot in those months before and after the baby was born. I cannot imagine even contemplating turning my back on her to embark on the campaign trail.

I can't go on...I am choking on the hypocrisy of politics.

Mrs Palin's daughter is 17, she has said her daughter is 5 months pregnant, going to keep the baby and marry the father AND the parents of the bride to be support this decision.

Again, the parent's choice, but the legal age for marriage in Alaska is 18. If either or both are under the legal age of 18, parents must consent to the marriage in writing.

Sorry, but parents consenting to the marriage of their 17 year old pregnant daughter because she is pregnant, really, really makes me question the judgement of the potential vice president of the United States.

How many of us would willingly consent to the marriage of our 17 year old daughter because she is pregnant or consent to our son marrying the girl because he got her pregnant?

That's nothing more than "babes playing house with a legal piece of paper so they can be babies having babies and babies bringing up babies."

Sorry but I can't support that, nor can I support the McCain/Palin ticket for a million different reasons and that one just adds to the list.

from:
Marriage license requirements in state of Alaska
What is the minimum age a man or woman may marry?

You must be 18 years old or older to marry without parental consent. A birth certificate may be necessary to show proof of age.

What if one or both of us is younger than 18?

If either partner is under 18, parents or legal guardians must be present. If a parent can not be present, due to death, separation, divorce or other circumstances, proper evidence must be presented for verification. You will need a certified copy of your birth certificate.

Ingrid

" On his MySpace page, Johnston boasts," "I'm a f - - -in' redneck" who likes to snowboard and ride dirt bikes.
"But I live to play hockey. I like to go camping and hang out with the boys, do some fishing, shoot some s- - - and just f - - -in' chillin' I guess."
"Ya f - - - with me I'll kick [your] xxx," he added.

He also claims to be "in a relationship," but states, "I don't want kids." ....
N.Y.Post Article

The MySpace revelation is one reason I tell my grandkids to be careful what they make public. It can come back and haunt. The boy sounds like what he is, an immature kid who is probably just as confused and upset about what is happening in his own young life as all the other players. I'm sure the MySpace listing will disappear before this day is out--the McCain campaign will see to that.

We were all young once and most of did some really dumb things when we were young.

I wouldn’t let that be my total impression of a teenager.

I've seen behavior and comments on these forums that people should be more ashamed of than Bristol Palin should.

If there is an issue about shame, it should be that people should be ashamed of making an issue about a family's personal life and not respecting an individual's right to choose.

It's especially ironic that posters who otherwise are ready to condemn people at the drop of a hat post under the guise of concern for a mother daughter relationship.

Spewey: Sorry but all that changes when you place yourself in the public spotlight. Palin is against abortion even in the case of rape. I would be more inclined to respect her right to choose, if only she would respect others' right to choose.

It's almost as ironic as watching the twisting McCainers people trying to defend his impulsive and awful choice for Veep.

There is too much at stake in this election to take anything for granted.

McCain has painted himself into a corner. The corner is labeled "risky" and "questionable judgement". If he dumps her, the wingers will hate him. If he keeps her (which I'm hoping for), independents will not vote for him. Especially the more the public gets to know her.

just a thought...I'm pro-Obama, BTW

demifloyd: Back off on the personal insults. I asked the question, because I--personally--do think that Palin's decision in this matter is indicative of her skewed value system and wanted to see what other people thought. If you think differently, that's fine--but there's no reason for you to use this thread as an opportunity to suggest that I am operating under a "guise of concern."

On your other comment: Yes, some people--including me--are worried about the McCain/Palin ticket, because some of us believe that these people are dangerous. How anyone can seriously believe that Palin is even remotely qualified to hold the most powerful and highest public office in the world is nothing short of astounding. And what I hear over and over on this board by the people intending to vote for them is not any reference to their policies, specifically, but rather impressionistic fantasies of whom they believe these people--and Obama--to be. To vote for McCain/Palin, for example, because someone thinks Obama is a "socialist" is just mind-boggling. That's a fear-based vote that has no grounding in reality whatsoever. It's just more right-wing lies being circulated as truth, and people pick up on it as the truth and use it as a basis for rejecting Obama. In addition, I've heard a lot of references to Obama as, emphatically, Barack HUSSEIN Obama, who is really, secretly a Muslim. Etc., ad nauseum. It's becoming increasingly clear to me that some people just cannot handle the idea of a black man in the White House. They will talk over, around, and beneath that prejudice, but basically, as I see it, "socialist" and "Muslim sympathizer" is just code for "black." There's no other way for me to interpret those epithets, because I've yet to see a shred of evidence to support them.

If I had been Bristol's parents, I would not have encouraged her to marry under these circumstances. To h3ll with the stigma of out of wedlock birth - I'd rather have one loving parent than a dysfunctional pair.

I meant no insult to you, but I am entitled to my opinion.
It was only a day or so ago that a poster on another forum stated they were Jewish and you repeatedly told them they were not and could not be. So if you want to accuse people of insults, you don't need to look very far--your own posts.

I will tell you what is an insult to those that do not support Barack Obama for president--your words:

"It's becoming increasingly clear to me that some people just cannot handle the idea of a black man in the White House. They will talk over, around, and beneath that prejudice, but basically, as I see it, "socialist" and "Muslim sympathizer" is just code for "black." There's no other way for me to interpret those epithets, because I've yet to see a shred of evidence to support them."

My use of the word "shame" has been explained by me more than once. If you choose to continue to willfully insist that I have other, more sinister motives--that speaks more about you than it does about me.

My use of the words "legitimacy or illegitimacy" was to signify that my main concern with asking the question was not related to whether someone felt Palin was otherwise a legitimate or illegitimate candidate. Which means I did not want the thread to degenerate into people arguing about her qualifications beyond the realm of my question. But again, you choose to see something manipulative and covert. Because, being the horrible person that I am, I couldn't possibly be interested just in the question I asked itself.

Yes, I had a hard time believing that poster was Jewish when her comments were anti-semitic. No surprise there. But thanks for reminding me of your continuing, and rather disturbing, obsessive dislike of me.

As for my supposed "insult" about people who accuse Obama of being a "socialist" and a "Muslim sympathizer," how then, do you explain it? Where is the evidence?

I don't know you. I only know how you treat people you don't agree with and the assumptions you make about them. Even you have acknowledged your heated responses and the fact that people react to them. Passion for anything can be admirable, but when people who make a statement you don't agree with are vilified, it tends to negate the legitimacy of your points and it certainly dampens discourse, at least with those that do not particularly enjoy getting down in the mud, which I realize is a sport that some do enjoy.

Regarding your last statement, I think it's fairly obvious how you have accused some non-Obama supporters of being racist.

Yes, I think some non-Obama supporters are racist. Absolutely. This is America. Is that a surprise to you? Because, once again, where is the evidence for that which they accuse him of?

And as far as the myspace thing, I wish each person who finds that shocking could read the myspace/facebook postings of some young person they know. I have college/high school kids and have always told them to NEVER put anything there, or anyplace else online that you would not want on every bulletin board at school. I have seen some postings of kids I know from their schools, kids I know to be good students, nice polite kids, and the language they use is awful- and universal. Hopefully it's a phase they pass through, but the day will come when they will regret it.
I don't advocate teenage marriage, it can be tough enough with way more life experience. I wish Bristol well, and any other young person who chooses that path. Some really do make it.
I don't yet know who gets my vote, but on the personal stuff, please be kind and drop the cattiness. Obama said families and children are off limits, and he will fire any campaign worker who does not respect that. All you who support him, taking note of that is a good idea. To do otherwise, kind of diminishes your credence.

And what is with this 'shame' thing. That turns me off to no end. From a personal standpoint I think children should not have children or get married too young and if she was my daughter (or son) I would be encouraging a completely different direction and that would be my (our) choice. If Palin has her way I would not have that option, and would be forced to do what she has done, which I personally don't agree with from my own standpoint.

Palin is living her convictions however, she opposes abortion and apparently so does her daughter. Getting married is another choice they have selected. I personally don't think this is a great role model to encourage children having children and getting married so young, but that is just me. Anybody is free to do what they want regarding this, and as a Democrat I want free choice in this area to remain for all of us. Palin's own position is what draws the discussion IMO, for the most part. Her daughter and the boyfriend are unfortunate pawns at this point, IMO.

We have heard her personal beliefs....but has she acted to enforce them on the people in Alaksa?

Or...is this all assumption?

"She doesn't make exception for rape and incest, only for health of the mother," he said.
"

She has also opposed sex-ed and wanted to make parental consent for abortion part of the AK constitution.

Read this and tell me if you have any doubts about what her position is:

Speaking before the Pentecostal church, Palin painted the current war in Iraq as a messianic affair in which the United States could act out the will of the Lord.

"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God," she exhorted the congregants. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."

Religion, however, was not strictly a thread in Palin's foreign policy. It was part of her energy proposals as well. Just prior to discussing Iraq, Alaska's governor asked the audience to pray for another matter -- a $30 billion national gas pipeline project that she wanted built in the state. "I think God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that," she said.

You don't have ignore reality to justify or hedge your vote to me or anyone else.... other than yourself.

"As far as Palin's role as a mother goes, I really think that topic should be off the table. I think it's unfair to castigate her for accepting the nomination based on the fact that she has kids. In fact, I think it's appallingly retrograde, and should play absolutely no role in assessing her qualities for the position of V.P. Would a male choice for V.P. be castigated for accepting the nomination if he had 5 children? Somehow, I doubt it."

Once she found out about the baby, then I guess she changed her mind. As she is not running for any office, she can change her mind as many time she wants and frequently as she pleases, but I think it is good to know all her opinions so that we get better understanding what she is trying to say.

Monica, I don't get the thrust of your question. Governors do not introduce legislation. And, as far as I know, the Alaskan legislature has never sent her a "ban abortion" type bill, so there is nothing for her to veto or not.

Are you implying that although her personal views are "pro-life," she does not believe in taking away other women's rights to make their own decisions on the abortion issue? If so, that would make her PRO-CHOICE. That is the essence of the pro-choice position--every woman deciding for herself whether or not she supports abortion rights.

I can assure you that the "pro-life" groups are very good at spotting wobblers on their issues. If Palin believes that everybody should be free to make their own choices on the abortion issue, the "pro-life" groups would have a collective heart attack. They know that is the pro-choice position and are 100% opposed to it. Since they are very excited about her, and their agenda, as they freely admit, is to finally banish all abortion, that should tell you everything you need to know. Anyone who isn't willing to take public action to help attain that goal would be viewed as some kind of heretic.

Now, if you are asking is banning abortion high on her list of priorities, it doesn't seem to be at the moment. She is much more interested in pushing what she calls "reform" issues having to do with oil and the environment, etc. (not "reform" in my book, however). But that is no assurance that she would buck the "pro-life" groups if or when an abortion issue came to the forefront--especially if she were suddenly to become president and have to power to sign or veto a "ban abortion" bill from Congress. If she did not sign it, howls of "traitor" would be heard from here to kingdom come! Why would she court their endorsement if she did not agree with them?

Kate

Kate...and neither do Presidents or Vice Presidents. So, why the scare tactics that Palin would be able, as VP, to "do" anything about current laws or constitutional amendments. And remember, any SC nominee would have to pass through congress. They would be soundly "Borked".

Are you implying that although her personal views are "pro-life," she does not believe in taking away other women's rights to make their own decisions on the abortion issue? If so, that would make her PRO-CHOICE.

I know what pro-choice is. I AM pro-choice...and anti-abortion. Both stances are personal opinions which I also don't believe in forcing on others because it wouldn't be constitutional.

And that is the crux of my response. Sarah Palin has demonstrated that, as Governor, she bows to the constitutional...while reserving the right to speak her opinion as an aside when she disagrees.

All this talk about her acting to rescind women's rights are only assumptions, not based on any events.

"All this talk" is both good and important.

Based on things she and her campaign spokesperson has said, I believe that she is NOT pro-choice. And I belive, again based on quotes, that she will happily, if given the chance, nominate anti-choice Supreme Court candidates, put anti-choice people in charge of agencies such as the Dept of HHS, which DO have an effect on a woman's right to choose, and other things to interfere with a woman's right to choose.

I've been lurking for a while, and learning a whole lot from reading the posts and links here. In answer to monica_pa's question, we have little to judge her by except her scant experience as mayor and governor. I did however, find these bits in an interesting article about her during her time as mayor of Wasilla:

"But in the first major race of her career — the 1996 campaign for mayor of her hometown, Wasilla — Palin was a far more conventional politician. In fact, according to some who were involved in that fight, Palin was a highly polarizing political figure who brought partisan politics and hot-button social issues like abortion and gun control into a mayoral race that had traditionally been contested like a friendly intramural contest among neighbors."

And:

"Stein says that as mayor, Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast." That woman, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire Baker for not giving "full support" to the mayor."

As well as:

"Palin ended up dismissing almost all the city department heads who had been loyal to Stein, including a few who had been instrumental in getting her into politics to begin with."

Now, take from the article what you will, but if true, it describes someone who does at times (to her credit, there are other incidences where she refrained) inappropriately injects her personal beliefs into governing, and who, from her emerging pattern of firing people who do not fall into lock-step with her beliefs, seems unwilling to work with and listen to those with opposing views. No, she won't be introducing or passing laws, but she could be influential (as Cheney is) in shaping policy that affects us all, not to mention appointing Supreme Court Justices and cabinet heads as other posters above have pointed out.

Perhaps she has changed since her time as mayor, but I won't be voting for her because I disagree with her conservative social stances and I don't believe she has the economic and foreign&domestic policy experience to lead us, nor am I confident that she would value expertise over loyalty in key positions, one of Bush's biggest faults, IMO.

You owed me an apology on that other thread. You wrote the personal insults, not I. Now you have dragged the situation over here. And let's not hear about how Demifloyd brought up the subject. *You* repeated the specifics.

Kindly stop it. Now.

Sable, aka
Devorah Bat Avraham Avinu
Deborah, Daughter of our father Abraham

Anyone with a knowledge of Judaism knows what that name indicates.

YOU kindly stop it, please. And NOW.

Make of it what you will. Interesting that you are turning the focus away from the topic to me. What's the point of that, if not to lobby a personal attack?

I see a lot of people posting what looks like her personal opinion but somehow in all these threads nobody has ever posted the following.

6. If Roe v. Wade were overturned and states could once again prohibit abortion, in your view, to what extent should abortion be prohibited in Alaska?
Under this hypothetical scenario, it would not be up to the governor to unilaterally ban anything. It would be up to the people of Alaska to discuss and decide how we would like our society to reflect our values.

OMG, did you read that? She says she as Governor is not in a position to ban abortion but instead leaves it up to the citizenry to decide in a democratic process.

And while she can't create legislation she as Governor can pass or veto it. As we saw with her veto that allowed same sex couples to get state benefits because it complied with the constitution even though she is personally against gay marriage.

Another area where one could find evidence of the accusation that she wants to ban abortion is in the judge she appointed to the Alaska Supreme Court. Is there any evidence the judge she appointed would hinder the reproductive rights of women in the state?

---------------------------

This Governor is very complex and certainly more complex than the people who have been trashing her. I find her a walking contradiction (in a good way) and her stances kind of odd for a Republican. Look at question 24 and compare that answer to the answers and rhetoric of other Republicans back in '06.

CNBC showed a one-hour interview with her by Maria Bartiromo, in Alaska. IMO Joe Biden should not consider her a lightweight. Bartiromo is another woman who's found great success in a heretofore mainly male world. She asked good questions and Palin was articulate and specific in her answers.

There--see how easy that was. Politicians do that all over the country. She could too.

But she has not. And that is telling. Why? Because she would be taking a public pro-choice position that would outrage the conservative/right-wing religious voters she is supposed to get excited about the McCain ticket. Since the Republican Party Platform will call for a complete ban on ALL abortions, she would be in direct conflict with the platform she is supposed to help implement.

If she is just pretending to go along with the "pro-life" agenda, then she is a hypocrite compromising the integrity of her own stated principles. That is not a strong recommendation for the highest office in the land.

However, I take her at her word. She says she is against abortion and she does not make a distinction between her personal beliefs and her public policies. I believe her. And so do the "pro-life" groups.

Monica--if Palin is elected VP, she could become president, and as president, she could influence the whole situation. Presidents (and VP's, for that matter) can bring pressure to bear on various representatives and senators. THere is a lot of power at the top and power-deals are made all the time in Washington, DC.

She could also sign any anti-abortion bills that make it to her desk. In case you haven't noticed, a major strategy the "pro-lifers" have engaged in for several decades now is to try to add a restriction here, another restriction there, and another one and another one. They admit they are trying to erode Roe v Wade so seriously--one restriction after another--that by the time they finish restricting it, Roe v Wade will be almost fully gutted. In that case, they won't need to overturn the decision since they will have restricted it to death.

And yes, if she becomes president, she could nominate justices that she hopes will be anti-abortion-rights. Her White House would then train the nominee on how to avoid answering that question before Congress. That way Congress can't vote against the nominee on the basis of his/her anti-abortion views. This has happened over and over again for decades now--this isn't news to anyone who has watched the hearings. (The Souter nomination did backfire, however--he was supposed to be anti-abortion, according to --which president was that? George Senior?-- to the Republican president, but he turned out to be a supporter of Roe v Wade). And while that process is going on, the White House can apply a lot of arm-twisting and bargaining to help get the desired vote.

Those are just some of the things someone at the top can do. And if Palin wanted to reassure us that she would NOT do those things, all she has to do is stand up in front of a microphone and say her public policy on abortion will be PRO-CHOICE, regardless of her personal beliefs.

I predict you will never hear her say that.

Kate

Meanwhile Laura Bush is praising "No Child Left Behind" and telling us, telling us that 50 million people in Iraq and Afghanistan are now living in freedom... at the same time, NPR is reporting the Death Penalty for a young 23 year old student who looked up Women rights on his computer in Afghanistan .. boy oh boy that's the kind of freedom McCain and Palin can get behind.

"Sen. John McCain's choice of Alaska governor Sarah Palin as his running mate is a cynical effort to appeal to disappointed Hillary Clinton voters and get them to vote, ultimately, against their own self-interest.

Gov. Palin may be the second woman vice-presidential candidate on a major party ticket, but she is not the right woman. Sadly, she is a woman who opposes women's rights, just like John McCain.

The fact that Palin is a mother of five who has a 4-month-old baby, a woman who is juggling work and family responsibilities, will speak to many women. But will Palin speak FOR women? Based on her record and her stated positions, the answer is clearly No.

In a gubernatorial debate, Palin stated emphatically that her opposition to abortion was so great, so total, that even if her teenage daughter was impregnated by a rapist, she would "choose life" -- meaning apparently that she would not permit her daughter to have an abortion.

Palin also had to withdraw her appointment of a top public safety commissioner who had been reprimanded for sexual harassment, although Palin had been warned about his background through letters by the sexual harassment complainant.

What McCain does not understand is that women supported Hillary Clinton not just because she was a woman, but because she was a champion on their issues. They will surely not find Sarah Palin to be an advocate for women.

Sen. Joe Biden is the VP candidate who appeals to women, with his authorship and championing of landmark domestic violence legislation, support for pay equity, and advocacy for women around the world.

Finally, as the chair of NOW's Political Action Committee, I am frequently asked whether NOW supports women candidates just because they are women. This gives me an opportunity to once again answer that question with an emphatic 'No.' We recognize the importance of having women's rights supporters at every level but, like Sarah Palin, not every woman supports women's rights."

I gather quite a few women supported Hillary Clinton because she was running against Obama, who they don't like at all. McCain is not aiming the Clinton voters who supported her just because of women's issues; he's looking for those that have no intent of voting for Obama after the way the Democrat Party rejected her, or because they don't trust or like Obama.

Sen. Joe Biden is the VP candidate who appeals to women...

You might want to run that statement by Anita Hill, or any woman that watched the Clarence Thomas hearings.

Yeah, a lot of people didn't want universal health care. No problem, we're not going to get it from McCain or Obama.

Women I know are up on current affairs. Men, too. Except for you.

I'm not interested in who is having an affair with who. I am much more attuned to world events, political commentary, and environmental matters, and focus my reading in those fields instead. I'll leave close study of People magazine to others.

"I'm not interested in who is having an affair with who. I am much more attuned to world events, political commentary, and environmental matters, and focus my reading in those fields instead. I'll leave close study of People magazine to others."

This explains much. Do try and catch up, won't you?

Really, you've gathered all these women and *know* their inner most likes and dislikes.... and they (according to you) don't like Obama "at all"? That's pretty chauvinistic and presumptuous of you isn't it? Or are you practicing you're own special mind control? (again)

Oh, it's not me or my own opinion, but something I saw over the campaign on various political discussion boards from some, not all women. I'm only reporting what remarks I read made by some (not all) Clinton supporters. In contrast, you are the one actually being presumptuous by ascribing motives to me that I don't even have.

You might want to run that statement by Anita Hill, or any woman that watched the Clarence Thomas hearings.
-------------------------

Fortunately, Biden has evolved since then and is now a strong supporter of women's issues (see the supportive statements by groups like NOW). Thank goodness some politicians grow and mature over time.

But he was truly infuriating back at the time of the Clarence Thomas hearing, wasn't he!

Kate

Kate, you are much better than I at getting Spewey up to speed about Senator Biden. I have no tolerance for someone whose only comment goes back years when it is apparent he has no knowledge of how Senator Biden has redeemed himself by way of being in strong support of women's rights.

Not in my book. I know many people who didn't believe her story.

I know many, many people who did because her story was in keeping with their experiences.

That's the feeling I keep getting from this whole surreal Palin extravaganza. Republicans have come a long way very, very quickly. They're downright liberal in their defense of Palin's inexperience as well as her life choices. Either that or downright cynical.

I do however, for the most part, agree with them. There is plenty of red meat in her past policy positions with which to disagree without parsing mother/family/baby gibberish. I can't help but keep wondering how this might have played out were the shoe on the other foot though.

Fast forward a few weeks. Sarah Palin's daughter isn't running for anything. She's a pregnant high school girl engaged to marry her boyfriend. Only in the sickest of worlds would the press become hysterical over one teen's pregnancy. What a laughable "strategy" for scoring political points against her mom.