This is a little scrapbook I just put together of some family shots from candidates past. I’ve been reading a lot lately on how the 17 year old Palin daughter is “fair game” for the media because the Palin family has allowed the children to be photographed in a positive light (as if no other family ever allowed pictures of their families to be taken.) They say the campaign mentioned that Palin gave birth to a Downs Syndrome child. They say the campaign talked about how their son was shipping to Iraq. So for them, that makes it open season on the entire family.
Now, Hillary Clinton had Chelsea actually giving speeches on her behalf but the media still had a “hands-off” policy when it came to Chelsea.
This from the Boston Herald talking about Barney Frank:
“They’re the ones that made an issue of her family,” Frank, D-Mass., said Tuesday in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.
Republicans stressed Palin’s conservative family values in announcing her selection as John McCain’s running mate on Friday. Frank says the recent disclosure about her daughter blunts conservative claims that liberalism harms family life.
Roger Simon wrote in the Politico:
Sarah Palin wanted the media to report on her teenage son, Track, who enlisted in the Army on Sept. 11, 2007, and soon will deploy to Iraq.
Sarah Palin did not want the media to report on her teenage daughter, Bristol, who is pregnant and unmarried.
The media, I believe, has overplayed its hand. If you watch, they’re now defending themselves and pleading ignorance as to who brought this story up. They know they went too far by attacking a 17 year old girl, who I feel deeply sorry for.
The media, because they don’t understand conservatives, believed that by telling everyone about 17 year old Bristol’s pregnancy that social conservatives would shun them. I mean, is their understanding of religious people limited to their reading Nathaniel Hawthorne in college? Conservatives embraced the Palin family as they should much to the media’s surprise. They embraced them, not because they’re perfect but because they’re not yet they’re still attempting to do the right thing.
And now the media is saying that they didn’t mean to cover the actual pregnancy or scandalize a young girl, they were just trying to cover the vetting process as a way of showing that McCain recklessly chose Palin. This, of course, is a lie. They attempted to destroy Sarah Palin and didn’t care that they were dragging an innocent 17 year old through the mud. We will not forget. As proof, look at this picture from Newsbusters.
September 4, 2008 at 6:03 pm
I think you are missing something here. Yes the liberal media has been vicious. There are several issues at work here, however. Democrats/liberals do not ever stake a claim on family values—the Republicans do. If Chelsea Clinton had gotten pregnant at 16, Rush Limbaugh would have had a field day. The Republicans, for many years, have been carrying their “family values” stick around. Family values doesn’t just mean not having an abortion. Here in lies the media attack–the Palin’s HID Bristol’s pregnancy on Friday at the VP announcement by having Bristol carry little Trig around. They stayed sequestered over the weekend and then on Monday, after nasty rumors were flying, announced Bristol’s pregnancy. Then, on top of that, they brushed it off as noble because Bristol and Levi were getting married anyway. I’m not one of them–but it irks me. It seems the Palin’s did one of two things–they knew the media would attack so they “hid” the pregnancy or John McCain didn’t know about the pregnancy so they were trying to hide it from him. Your vitriol at the media is showing. Sarah Palin is not perfect. This situation could have been handled better.
The other issue: The US has the highest teen unmarried pregnancy rate in the civilized world. We should be talking about. The Republicans seem to want to brush it off because “it happens in most families.” Well, why? It isn’t normal, but we want to mainstream it.
Are they trying to destroy Sarah Palin? Probably. But Sarah gave them the harpoon to shoot her with.
September 4, 2008 at 6:13 pm
Marie is on the mark. Perhaps the hand’s-off on Chelsea is that there is nothing to report? The media, liberal or conservative, tend toward the sensational. I’m sure if there was dirt to be had on Chelsea someone would have gotten it out there.
September 4, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Yes. We’re the problem. The media drags a 17 year old girl through the mud and it’s our fault. Right. I’m sure you’re absolutely right.
September 4, 2008 at 6:46 pm
I think they also read the Crucible in college too.
Hid the pregnancy? Here’s the better question, who cares if she’s pregnant. We aren’t canonizing Sarah and her family, we’re promoting her as the Vice President. The media did go way over board on this. The New York Times had a front page, top fold article on this! I mean get a life. How about the fact that Obama was born to a teenage mother to an African foreign nation who was cheating on his wife? And then she left him in the care of her parents as she ran off. Does anyone care? If they do, they need to get a life as well.
I’ll take the Palin family values over the Clinton or Obama family values any day of the week, month, or year.
September 4, 2008 at 6:58 pm
All of a sudden we have an influx of ultra left wing commentators trolling Catholic blog sites. Are they trying to succeed where Nancy Pelosi failed? Notice how the level of vitriol rises when those who know themselves to be wrong, deep down, menace those who are on the side of the angels. “Holy Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle,….”
September 4, 2008 at 6:59 pm
If they do read Nathaniel Hawthorne they’ll read about redemption and the forgiving nature of small town America. Hester is forgiven and loved in the end. Kit
September 4, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Marie:
I find your logic bizarre, quite frankly. Do you seriously think that Bristol Palin (the oldest daughter and likely main “sitter” for her younger sibs) took baby Trig in her arms for the first time on Friday so they could be poster children for the big announcement?
EVERY candidate has his or her family by their side when they are introduced to the public, make a convention speech, etc. I saw a smiling Michelle Obama and two adorable daughters on stage last week in Denver. The Obamas even trotted those girls out for a magazine feature in the recent past.
JFK’s kids were seen in public with him. The Gore daughters were on stage when Al accepted the VP nomination. I could go on and on.
A candidate standing up, in public, with his/her family, as virtually all do, is not tantamount to “inviting” a full-scale attack on your kids and your values, which is what we witnessed a couple of days ago with the Palins.
September 4, 2008 at 7:12 pm
“The situation could have been handled better.”
Actually, I thought they handled it very well. Yes, it is obvious Bristol held Trig in order to camouflage her pregnancy. Sarah Palin’s announcement as VP was not the time to disclose it. They did disclose her pregnancy to the public in a timely manner, obviously it was a situation that could not have been hidden much longer.
Just because conservative pundits are choosing not to skewer the Palin’s for having an unwed pregnant daughter, does not mean they are just brushing the issue off.
September 4, 2008 at 7:18 pm
Western society is overpopulated by liars and gossipmongers. It would seem the Church has much work left to do.
The Palin’s have attempted to protect their child with every act of discretion and care that good parents show toward their children when those same children face a significant challenge in life.
The Palin’s have shown consistency in their prolife beliefs by embracing their daughter’s pregnancy and the young man who is the father of their daughter’s child. In other words, the real story is about integrity, that this conservative politician has shown solidarity with her husband and children and the family is standing behind their wife and mother.
The self righteous condescending liberal media seem to have convinced everyone that it’s open season on the Palin’s. Sarah Palin, however, knows how to hunt and use a (verbal) gun – it’s open season on the media. Judging from her speech the other night, she has trained her sights on the media. The hunter (the media) has become the hunted.
September 4, 2008 at 7:47 pm
Bristol Palin’s expecting has nothing whatsoever to do with Sarah Palin’s qualifications as VP!
Or does it?
If it does, why is the media not over Obama and his screwy family situation?
Sarah Palin’s credentials are obvious: being mayor of small town is sort of like being a community organiser; only you actually have responsibility….
When young people become pregnant out of wedlock, Obama calls it a “punishment” and, hey presto, has the solution: quick get them into the abortuary.
Sarah Palin’s solution is to face the challenge and Bristol and her fiancee have to do some quick growing up to learn to be parents. It is obvious that Sarah and Todd Palin have been good role models in this regard as none of their 5 children is considered a “punishment” but a blessing!
How did that post go a few days ago? It is indeed all about abortion.
Blessings, Mom26
September 4, 2008 at 7:54 pm
I am an independent leaning liberal who does think that Palin’s family should be off limits. Not only should she be the target of ridicule, but she also shouldn’t be regarded as a Saint for making the family choices she made. Good for her for keeping her child with down syndrome – but I think that should be expected. It was not rape, or incest that created that child and she is in excellent financial shape to care for him – so I sure hope abortion was not considered! Even someone who isn’t completely pro-life (I agree more with Cindy McCain than Palin on abortion) can agree with that.
Also – I worry that her daughter and her boyfriend are being pressured into marriage for political reasons. I hope that’s not the case and that it was a decision they were allowed to make freely. I doubt I am the only one who questions whether this is true. I wish the best for these two and their child.
And as others said – the media would definitely hop onto a similar story if it were a liberal. They go after what is interesting. Obama’s kids haven’t gotten into any crazy situation and Chelsea also seemed to be a pretty boring kid. Palin must have known that this was going to happen. Anyone could have predicted these topics would be interesting to the media.
September 4, 2008 at 8:11 pm
What the media is doing, and doing still by defending themselves, is just igniting the resolve of the of Christians and conservatives.
The left leaning commenters of this blog are doing Obama no favor with their defenses.
September 4, 2008 at 8:25 pm
So anon,
once again, it was Sarah Palin’s fault. Nice.
September 4, 2008 at 8:45 pm
Matthew,
You’re not the problem. The Palin’s family affairs are their business. But the liberal media is REAL. They are VICIOUS. For a political figure not to understand this is niave. I like Sarah Palin and FWIW I am not ultra left wing. I am actually quite traditionally conservative, which probably makes me more critical. My point is only that the Palin’s had to know the media’s reaction and the outcome for Bristol. If they didn’t, they must not have a television. Yes, they DID hide her pregnancy on Friday and it gave the media more ammunition. The Palin’s are not simply victim’s here. And it’s disgusting to make them out that way. They are human, yes, but once you run for national office you whole life is under scrutiny. It’s sad that this girl’s pregnancy is even an issue—but it is for more reasons than one. If the Palin’s didn’t know she would become a target, then it’s clear they are far to isolated to be on the national stage. That’s my point. I feel SORRY for Bristol. I feel compassion for Bristol. She did not fling herself into the public eye—her parents put her there. And for that, they ARE responsible. Period. Don’t blame the media. Bill and Hillary, FWIW, hid Chelsea as much as possible. But if she had been photographed smoking a bong at a party–you bet someone would have made it an issue.
September 4, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Marie said:
“Bill and Hillary, FWIW, hid Chelsea as much as possible. But if she had been photographed smoking a bong at a party–you bet someone would have made it an issue.”
Really? The media did such a VICIOUS job reporting the details of Al Gore’s son that you must have already forgotten that he was arrested for drugs, with footage on film of him handcuffed. It was a momentary news blip.
BTW, I ask you, during that coverage, did we have the national media wondering out loud if the Gores’ son suffered from poor parenting because Al had to devote so much time to his political career? Can you even imagine ANY talking head suggesting such a ridiculous thing about Al Gore?
You are right, the media is quite vicious, but selectively so.
Kate
September 4, 2008 at 9:58 pm
Well said, Kate. And BTW, anyone who’s voting libertarian. FYI, that party is not a pro-life party.
September 5, 2008 at 12:10 am
Kate,
I do remember Al Gore III’s drug charges. It was all over the news. Fox and MSNBC went with it for what seemed forever. However, I do not recall the Gores telling the press to lay off. What I remember is them simply saying that it was a private matter and not screaming “foul.”
I think it abominable the way the press has treated the Palin matter. but I don’t think it was handled well in the first place and to be honest, we’re escalating things by keeping it in the news. Enough said.
September 5, 2008 at 12:44 am
sadly, 90% of Downs babies are aborted. It’s safe to assume that 90% are not financially strapped. . .these children are aborted because they are undesirable, or because their parents are convinced that a life that is not “beautiful” in the conmetic way is not worth living. A sad commentary on our society.
As for Bristol. Whatever! The media is doing what they do. She’ll be fine. Media coverage is not REAL like your family and friends are real. I’m thinking they aren’t sitting around keeping scap books of all the nastyness. I’m not!
September 5, 2008 at 11:49 am
Anthony,
You’re right, the Libertarian Party is not officially pro-life. They let each candidate decide for himself or herself on the issue, like many other issues. So that is why you can get Bob Barr, who has a far stronger record of being pro-life than McCain, as their candidate for president. The idea is that you don’t vote for a party, you vote for a person. And thus, Barr still in my eyes is a much better candidate for president than anyone else. Now, if the Republicans nominated Palin for President, that’s a different story…
September 5, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Uh, Al Gore III was a GROWN man when he was arrested in 2007. He was 24 y/o. Bristol Palin is 17 and still under the care of her parents. Do any of you NOT see the contradiction here? Jenna and Barbara Bush were in college when they were in alcohol related trouble. If Bristol were and ADULT this would definitely be a non-issue. This is the difference. Bristol Palin’s parents, Sarah and Todd, are STILL responsible for her care.