McCain wanted a "real" American, and he got his wish. Real Americans often have really embarrassing problems. I think that McCain is beginning to realize why he avoids "Real" Americans as much as possible while flying from mansion to mansion in his wife's private jets. If McCain gets elected and breaks his hip, this woman is going to be president. Egad.

That said, a senile kook and a woman with more family problems than most soap operas can fit into a year would still do a better job than Bush.

Interestingly, no one has considered that Cheney's daughter being a lesbian is a reason he's a bad VP. I guess "family problems" look bad only when women run for office. Also, are you saying that "real" Americans have no business running in a national election? I might be reading it wrong, but that's what I got out of it.

First, no one said that having family problems makes you a bad canddiate.

Second, the issue of Mary Cheney's lesbianism has come up on a number of occasions.

Like the teenage pregnancy with Palin, the issue is actually hypocrisy, not the family problems per se. The Republicans are the ones that preach against homosexuality; premarital sex; etc., yet when it is one of their own, they turn away and act as if there is nothing to see. Or worse, it is only an issue when the Democrats do it.

The fact of the matter is both McCain and Palin have been hardcore advocates of abstinence only education. The irony of it all is apparently lost on all the hypocrits.

We certainly are getting a lot of nice spin about this story.
First, having announced ghat he was taking off his politcs hat and putting on his america hat, whatever, McCain went to the Gulf and did a lot of photo ops looking serious and presidential, and there was Sara Palin along for the ride. Fine. Neigther of them was in a position to do much of anything constructive, but since McCain had SAID they weren't there for POLITICAL reasons, ther must have been some SECRET non-political business that took them there. Gosh, I wonder what it was.

And now we have Gov. Palin's family matters. The time frame is this: as Palin was a month from delivering her afterthought baby, her seventeen-year-old daughter was getting pregnant. A whole bunch of bad choices had been made in that family at that time. We still have no idea what, and how many, and I'm actually hoping not to ever know. I'm hoping that their family business stays theirs, and that Bristol's life is not made the topic of a press circus. She probably has enough problems without that.

One thing, though: will the religious-right constituency require a shotgun wedding to prove their candidate's commitment to virtue' her family's commitment to family values?

1) Quote: "That said, a senile kook and a woman with more family problems than most soap operas can fit into a year would still do a better job than Bush." I doubt the contrast with Bush was a favorable one. The comparison to soap operas was definitely not favorable. So, yes, the OP made a point of her family problems, which is what I was responding to.

2) I meant on this board; my apologies for not being more clear. Still, even on a national level, I didn't know Mr. Cheney's daughter was a lesbian until several years after he entered office. Mrs. Palin has been on the national stage for a week and even the people living under rocks know about her pregnant daughter. I smell a double standard.

3) My question: how is her daughter getting pregnant a reflection of Palin's hypocrisy?

Hypocrisy (Dictionary.com):

1.

a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.

2.

a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.

3.

an act or instance of hypocrisy.

Again, does Cheney's daughter being a lesbian make him a hypocrite? No, as he did not intentionally make her into a lesbian; her choice was made independently of his values (I'm including genetic predisposition under the heading of "choice" here). Now, Cheney being caught sleeping with a male intern would be hypocrisy, as he would be engaging in acts he himself has declared to be morally wrong. It's sort of how you can't hold Mrs. Clinton at fault for her philandering husband - the "sins" don't magically transfer, and I've heard nothing about "earning kneepads" in Mrs. Clinton's career.

If Palin insisted that her daughter quietly got an abortion, that would be hypocrisy, as she would be encouraging an act against her stated principles. It would also be hypocritical to give her daughter condoms and birth control, assuming that the reason that Palin does not support sexual education is because she feels it encourages pre-marital sex (as opposed to just feeling that families are in a better position to counsel their children on sexual issues). Palin never said that her daughter being unmarried, under 18 and pregnant was a good thing, just that she would welcome her grandchild and help her daughter. Now, perhaps she would not have gotten pregnant had the school taught her how to use a condom. That would be arguing with Palin's stated values, which is a legitimate political discussion. However, she has not violated those principles, and thus is not a hypocrite.

Spruce, what would you have Palin do? What, to you (pretending that you're Palin), would be the the politically and personally appropriate response to your pregnant teenaged daughter?

oxboggle:

...as Palin was a month from delivering her afterthought baby...

One of the things I like about Sen. Obama is that he has far too much class to say anything like this. Unfortunately for his campaign, the legions of his supporters who lack such class are going to taint him by association.

It may be that Karl Rove likes Gov. Palin as the VP because she inspires the left to show its ugliest side, driving undecided voters towards McCain.

Obama = Black.

I like McCain's odds better.

I didn't know Mr. Cheney's daughter was a lesbian until several years after he entered office.

Then I really question how much you've been paying attention. Not only has her lesbianism been discussed in the media, she in fact has worked as consultant for companies like Coors to market their product to gay and lesbian consumers.

I think the point Spruce is trying to make is that the Bush-Cheney ticket made opposition to gay rights a cornerstone issue in their reelection campaigin in 2004. The fact that Cheney's daughter is gay does raise the issue as to whether he really believes that homosexuality is as inherinently immoral as the GOP makes it out to be.

Now, having said that, I do think we should draw the line in dragging a teenage girl into the arena and making her into a poster child for why the abstinence-only policies her mother champions don't work. Mary Cheney is an adult and she made the decision to campaign on with her father. I think, however, that human decency demands that because Bristol Palin is still a minor, we should not make her an campaign issue.

1) The point is that I don't bother reading news that is only political mudslinging (that's the nice thing about the internet, and that is I can filter the fluff). By attention, I mean that my apolitical boss mentioned the pregnancy to me yesterday. You can't NOT bring her daughter up right now (partly because we have nothing else to talk about yet). With Cheney's daughter, it's sort of like what happened with Ms. Clinton's senior thesis, in that one only knew about it if one was actually following it. The only difference between those cases is that I don't actively follow homosexual-issues, but I follow academic freedom ones."Discussed in the media" means something only if one spends all day reading news. Unforetunately, most of us don't have that luxury.

2) So, to be consistent, he should have disowned his daughter? Or, better yet, support a "gay gene" test and have positive fetuses (fetii?) forcibly aborted? I guess Cheney can't win for losing...but, wait. Wouldn't Cheney's actual response be what was really desired by those who care about gay-issues? What's being argued is his political policy toward gays, not his treatment of them. It's not the disliking homosexuality bit, but the wanting to make the disliking of homosexuality bit part of US law. I see no reason why the Cheneys can't agree to disagree, since that seems to be what happened. Nothing in the GOP platform says otherwise. If Ms. Cheney's lifestyle is fine with the left, why "gay-bait" her father?

3) Actually, I would argue that it's not just minors that should be ethically off-limits (just because I said it was the only argument doesn't mean I like it; it's just the only true argument). For example, I don't feel that Mr. Clinton's affairs have anything to do with Mrs. Clinton's career. Some might argue that her response shows some aspect of her personality (good or bad), but does it? Does it mean that she favors certain divorce laws, or that the "sanctity of marriage" means nothing to her? Of course not, and that is about as relevant as that issue can reasonably be.

The problem is that merely talking about this is turning Ms. Palin into a poster child. So, the question is, who brought this up in the first place? A reporter hungry for a juicy story, or maybe a Democrat with a "welcome-to-the-club" dirt-digging guesture. Then again, maybe it's like the people who slow down to gawk at accidents; the public can smell blood a mile away.

1) I stand by my assertion. Cheney's daughter has been discussed enough in the past 8 years that anyone who did not know about it had to have been living under a rock.

2) That's up the Cheney. But is it really consistent to run on a platform that asserts that homosexuality is inherently immoral and yet still stand by an openly gay daughter? I really don't care what his relationship with her is. I just wonder how he can look her in the face after coming from a meeting when such strategies are being discussed. To me, it's like running on the Nazi platform and then going home and telling your Jewish cousin that you still love them.

3) I tend to think that family members should be off limits unless they make themselves part of the issue. Mary Cheney used her homosexuality to obtain work as a consultant and then campaigned with her father on an anti-gay platform. That makes her an issue. Likewise, the Clintons made Bill's behavior an issue by making him a key part of Hillary's campaign strategy.

Republicans talking about "class" amongst their supporters -- that's a fat one.

Keep talking--when Obama loses in November, look in the mirror and remind yourself how important is was to alienate the undecided voters with your nastiness.

Okay, apparently I'm the one who hasn't risen to current Republican standards of class and human kindness.

I put myself through school working in mental hospitals. it paid pretty well for LPN work and the hours were whatever I needed them to be. I saw a lot of Down Syndrome adults who'd been turfed out by their families when they weren't cute kids any more, or when the constant labor of dealing with a low-level Down's adult just wore them out. Divorce is really common in that situation. The Palins won't know for a while what their kid's prospects for life will be like. Maybe he'll be high level and everythign will be swell and they'll be happy, though I can't see the First Dude taking his kid to the special olympics. You think I'm heartless? LIfe is heartless.

I'm happy not knowing, but yes, an afterthought baby, and yes, the prospects for Down's go way up at her age and she already had four kids, so I don't think Bristol is the only one who's unclear on the concept regarding family planning. And YES, once again, this is none of my business, just as Bill Clinton's sex life was none of anybody's business, though a vasectomy for the First Dude would have prevented all this, and what will alienate the undecided voters is not MY NASTINESS, which is trivial, but the prospect of electing a drooling dotard who can't make the simplest of decisions rationally. I'm talking about MCCAIN, and how this whole fiasco reflects on him. He clearly doesn't know a damn thing about Palin's conduct in her last two jobs. He has a goofy, highly edited headline-level view of her, and seems to have some kind of crush. Is that what you really want in a President?

I look at McCain and Obama, and Obama's the one of the two who's grown up. If I were a thousand times as unpleasant as you seem to assume, it wouldn't change that. This fantasy you have about the ugly, mean, impolite Obama supporters seems to be the current version of the Spitting Hippie urban myth that reactionary tools used to shock each other back in the seventies. Get over it.

The reason I like Obama is simple: he's a grownup. You be one too, and maybe people will like you. Or continue to be a whining adolescent. It's a free country.