OK, let's be clear about this: there is no reason why having a daughter who is an unwed pregnant teenager disqualifies a person for high office. None at all. But since everyone is talking about it anyway, may I just point out that one of three things seems to be the case:
- Gov. Palin told Sen. McCain something like before you offer me the nomination, you should know that my daughter is seventeen, single and PG, although she is planning to marry the boy and raise the kid. And then Sen. McCain said something like no problem! Let's not mention it for a few days, though, all right?. And then the two of them wound up being backed into making an announcement the opening day of the convention, when there wasn't any actual convention, nor (thank the Divine) was the hurricane apocalyptic enough to take up all the news energy.
- Gov. Palin, when asked if she would accept the nomination, and if there was anything Sen. McCain needed to know, thought something like should I tell him that I'll be a grandmother soon? Nah, why would he care about that.
- Gov. Palin was unaware that her daughter was five months pregnant.
I mean, logically, unless I'm missing something, one of those three has to have happened. The first shows political incompetence that seems astonishing even for a Senator from Arizona, and if that's the case, it seems to indicate as clearly as anyone could ask that Sen. McCain is simply incapable of leading his Party, much less the country. The second shows a level of political imbecility on the part of the Vice-Presidential nominee that seems to indicate that she may be incapable even of fulfilling the constitutional office of Vice-President. The third, while on a personal level frightening and appalling, has little to do with her qualifications or Sen. McCain's, although one could at a stretch perhaps question her communication conduits with colleagues and underlings. Still, a mother-daughter relationship is significantly different from a working relationship; I don't think that situation, if true, constitutes anything but a personal scandal.
Of course, that third possibility is the one that would, if it were found out, force the Governor to withdraw.
Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.
I think she’s aware her daughter is 5 months pregnant. I mean, you can actually kind of tell in these pictures posted by John McCain’s daughter (who graduated from Columbia in 2007). Look near the bottom of the page — Bristol’s the one usually holding the baby to cover up her belly.
Sorry, that was me, not figuring out how this webform worked. (:
Jillian
Personally, I don’t care about the candidate’s religion unless the candidate is trying to control mine. I don’t care about the candidate’s reproductive choices unless the candidate is trying to control mine. I don’t care how the candidate raises their kids unless the candidate is trying to control how I raise mine. I just don’t care about the candidate’s private and family life unless the candidate is trying to control mine.
This candidate does not believe in a secular society. This candidate does not believe that there are private and family matters in which the government should not interfere. That makes her private and family life a reasonable subject to examine. But this candidate is also so appallingly unqualified for the job that I think it’s a terrible mistake to not simply and firmly reject her because of that. She abuses the powers of her office and lies about it, and I’ve had enough of that. She knows nothing about the federal government, or international relations, or science, and I’ve had enough of that. Worse than not knowing anything is her complete lack of curiosity and her unwillingness to listen to people who do know something, and I’ve had enough of that. And so have the American people.
I hadn’t seen those photos before. I don’t know that I would have spotted her as pregnant if I hadn’t been looking for it, and as you say, she’s holding the baby in front of her most of the time. I imagine that being in the second trimester, she’s holding on to the baby pretty often, particularly as the baby’s mother is busy a lot. On the other hand, I haven’t seen (or looked for) pictures of her from, say, six months ago, which would be a more informative contrast.
And yes, Michael, we’ve all had enough of that, I hope. My point (somewhat obscured by my method of telling it) is that the likely explanations show that Sen. McCain has very poor instincts backed by very poor habits of moderating those instincts. That’s not news to you, but I think this week’s news illustrates it, and illustrates it by way of a sex scandal, so people who aren’t interested in ‘politics’ may talk about it.
Thanks,
-V.
Well, the choices seem to be to make the election about Palin or about McCain or about Bush or about Obama, and I think that it’s better to use Palin to make it about Bush than to use Palin to make it about McCain. Either one is better than leaving it entirely about Palin, which is how the past 4 days have gone.
Or do both. McCain picked Palin because Palin=Bush and McCain loves Bush. We know McCain’s judgment is bad because he loves Bush. But if his judgment is bad just because of a sex scandal, then that’s just about McCain and Palin; Bush isn’t part of it.
Running against OOP is tempting, and the Democrats should certainly do some of that, but not too much. We ran against Ronald Reagan in 1988 and Poppy Bush won; the Republicans ran against Bill Clinton in 2000 and Al Gore won (although he didn’t actually take office, for some reason). And those were the sitting vice-presidents, clearly and obviously connected with the outgoing administration. Yes, OOP is deeply unpopular, because of all the failures, and we should take opportunities to remind people of that. But he will not be on the ballot. John McCain will be on the ballot, and it is his judgment and his abilities and his policies that we should focus on, as it will be his judgment and his abilities and his policies that would govern the country, if he were to win the election.
Thanks,
-V.
I haven’t been trying to verify sourcing on everything that’s been said on this matter, but I believe it has been reported that McCain knew, but most of his staff didn’t, so I think the way in which this situation has been presented to the public reflects directly upon the matter of Senator McCain’s political competence.
However, the failure of political judgment in bringing this situation to the public is minor compared to the failure of judgment shown in proposing Governor Palin for an office for which she is not remotely qualified. It suggests a) that John McCain doesn’t have much of a grasp of what being an effective President really entails and/or b) that John McCain is in denial about his own mortality, and those won’t really look straight on at the need for a Vice President who can lead the country in his own absence. Given all I have heard about McCain’s interest in chasing younger women, it wouldn’t surprise me if he is unable or unwilling to reflect seriously upon the realities of his aging.
Incidentally, it’s also becoming clearer why the Republicans chose the “he’s just an airhead celebrity” line of attack against Senator Obama: as usual, they were confusing matters by accusing the opposition of being exactly what they themselves are. McCain has (or had) a great public image, which he has assiduously cultivated by plying the press with what must once have been considerable personal charm (if you like the “Maverick” type), but there isn’t much substance behind the image. McCain shows no signs of exceptional intelligence, motivation, work ethic, wisdom gleaned from many years of holding national office, that would enable him to govern with any effectiveness. By attacking Obama on the “celebrity” angle first, they were both trying to turn Obama’s great popularity and amazing personal charm to a negative and protect McCain against a similar line of attack, to which he would have proved more vulnerable to it than has Obama, who has too much substance for it to be attack-added away.
About running against the outgoing president: what separates McCain from Bush père and Gore is that he is making “change” a buzzword of his candidacy. (I know this because it was there in BANNER TYPE on the newspapers this morning: MCCAIN SOMETHING SOMETHING CHANGE.)
Seems to me that looking back on his last 8 years of ties to Our Outgoing President could be directly relevant to the way he, himself, chooses to run his candidacy and less about standard-issue tarring the successor-intended with the incumbent brush.
Yes, there’s something horns-of-a-dilemma-ish about John McCain choosing to run on CHANGE. On one hand, I think it clearly makes him look weak, as it’s simply a no-I’m-not response to four days of being called More of the Same. And it’s a blatant attempt to co-opt the Barack Obama catchphrase, which also (to my eyes) looks rhetorically weak. On the other hand, he has to represent change, he has to eschew the current administration (did no Cabinet member, no high-ranking member of the Administration, speak at the RNC?) in order to win voters who normally dislike voting for the same party three times hand running, in addition to the specific problems of Our Only President and his secretive cabal of crooks and incompetents being unpopular because of all their failures.
Thanks,
-V.