Why would McCain think about replacing Palin?
I see very little downside here. Let's recap.
Woman. Mayor. Governor. Sued Feds for placing Polar Bears on endangered species act. Mother of 5, including newborn with Down Syndrome (or is it Down's Syndrome?). Born in Idaho. Hunts Moose. Stopped a "bridge to nowhere." 17 year old Daughter is pregnant. Fired some state police officer and is being sued for it. Naughty Librarian Hottie. Some strained relationship with Alaskan Independence Party. Husband is multiple cross-Alaska snow mobile champion and a (former?) union member. Son is headed to Iraq soon. Wants to drill for oil in Alaska. Sought Pork-Barrle for her state (well, duh, that is what Governor's do; blame a weak congress and executive for not stopping it).
If having a pregnant daughter and the "giant" scandal of firing an employee she disliked are the worst things on her, I say gidyup! Also, I see being part of the AIP (though she wasn't) as a huge plus. Alaska has as much right to rebel and secede from the Union as the original 13 did, and even the confederates after them. The difference between the three being their reasons for secession. Maybe you don't see Alaska as being an oppressed colony, but I don't think they are starting a slave trade, either.
Two other thoughts
1. When I learned her daughter was pregnant, I predicted that some on the Left would pat themselves on the back and show how abstinence ed doesn't work. They did, loudly and immediatly. I also predicted that some on the right would suggest she is a poor mother, they have, as well. And I think a lot of the scrutiny is sexist, we don't ask these questions about men's families. Suggesting she is less experienced (obviously not the case) than Obama also smacks of sexist patronization.
2. Alison pondered why "pro-choice" advocates decried woman CHOOSING to keep their babies. I assured her that they didn't and their rhetoric was aimed at choice, not abortion. But I've read several commentaries by pro-choice groups that, maybe not expressly but certainly impliedly, suggest that Mrs. Palin's choice to keep her child with Down's and her daughter's decision to keep her baby and marry are counter to the pro-choice movement. The way they juxtaposed the Palins' choices, didn't discuss other policy, and decried the example left me feeling like Alison's characterization was more accurate than I thought. I'm sure if I ask pro-choice people they will tell me otherwise, but it certainly isn't the message I've gotten lately . . .
Why when a Democrat has children in office do we call it "Camelot" but when a woman Republican does we wonder if she is fit to lead?
One other thought, it is interesting that larger Media outlets pretty much had to be forced to cover John Edwards affair, but Bristol Palin has been front-page news since the announcement. Especially puzzling because one was a candidate and the other basically a child.
2 comments:
You know, I have to say I sort of agree with you. I could care less about Bristol Palin being pregnant and I think her choice to keep her baby is a nonissue for both sides.
(Pro-choice and Pro-life, alike). The thing that bothers me about the whole thing is that I feel like we are supposed to applaude Palin's family for her daughter's choice. Since when is keeping a baby you have the means to provide for something that gets you a gold star? And since when is it our place to judge either way? It has absolutely no bearing on her mother's ability or inability to be the VP and is truly none of anyone's business. Also, the argument that because Palin is a mother (as opposed to a father), her children will be more of a distration is lame. She probably isn't home baking them cookies when they get home from school anyway (one would assume being the her current position is time consuming -- probably more than the cushy VP gig would be) and her family hasn't fallen apart. Palin should be judged on her experience and her views, not on her family and their choices.
I appreciated what Obama said about family being off limits. Quite frankly, talking about a politician's child is just another lame way for the media to avoid actually talking about issues and for them to capitalize on the 90210aspect of society.
Blah.
Now talking about a politician's personal choices (a la John "I'm a jerkface" Edwards) is something that is fair game. So, I'll start clicking on "Palin pregnant and keeping her illegitmate baby" stories only when it has to do with the actual Palin running for office.
According to Wikipedia, 91-93% of identified Down-syndrome pregnancies are aborted. If the numbers suggest anything, I think, giving birth to a Down's child suggests a pretty strong pro-life conviction. I was pretty surprised to see a rate that high.
What a tough question, though. I have family with Down's and can't imagine it as a reason to abort. But I also am aware of cases where mothers insist on giving birth to fetus with terminal-defects (fetus without brain stems) and even insist on keeping the brain-less child on life support. And most people I know think there are complications (usually life-threatening) that justify abortion. Sticky issues.
Post a Comment