Decision ‘08

In A Bizarre Twist To The Palin Fake Pregnancy Rumors…

…it turns out that Bristol Palin (now age 17) IS in fact pregnant at the moment! The campaign released the news in response to the fake pregnancy rumors concerning Palin’s 5th child, born with Down syndrome:

Bristol Palin, the 17-year-old daughter of Sarah Palin, is pregnant and will keep the baby and marry the father, a senior aide to Sen. John McCain confirmed to CNN Tuesday.

Republican presidential candidate McCain was aware of Bristol Palin’s pregnancy before he chose her mother for his running mate, the aide said.

“Senator McCain knew this and felt in no way did it disqualify her from being vice president,” said the aide. “Families have difficulties sometimes, and lucky for her she has a supportive family.”

The 17-year-old, a senior in high school, is about five months along, in her second trimester, according to the aide.

The aide said it was decided the campaign would reveal this information now because of rampant Internet rumors that Sarah Palin’s 4-month-old baby, who has Down syndrome, was actually Bristol’s.

“In the course of correcting that, we needed to get the truth out,” said the McCain aide.

Sarah and Todd Palin issued a statement saying they are “proud of Bristol’s decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents.”

Well, for cryin’ out loud, hopefully we can put this crap behind us now and focus on something substantive. I suppose there will be those (Andrew Sullivan, anyone?) who will feel ‘vindicated’ now at shopping the vile rumor that Palin faked her pregnancy to cover up for her daughter (hard to follow how a story that expressly PROVES that Palin would do no such thing would vindicate the rumor-mongers, but we’re not dealing with professional logicians here), but don’t be fooled. Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy is a private matter - what these folks were shopping was a smear aimed at impugning Palin’s integrity…and it just blew up on them in about the most extreme manner possible…

UPDATE 4:57 p.m.: Kudos to Barack Obama for his response:

Barack Obama is condemning campaign rumors involving the children of candidates, including Republican vice presidential contender Sarah Palin. He says he will fire any campaign worker that violates his rule.

Obama, speaking Monday to reporters in Michigan, said he thinks “people’s families are off limits, and people’s children are especially off limits.”

I appreciate the gesture…

38 Responses to “In A Bizarre Twist To The Palin Fake Pregnancy Rumors…”

1 Clint Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Congratulations, twice over, to Bristol and Levi and the whole Palin family!

That said, I hope you’re correct that this puts things behind us, but I suspect that you’re being too optimistic.

The Obama campaign has probably managed to assert sufficient message discipline (after the unforced errors when McCain announced his VP pick) that they won’t screw this up. But the far left is about to explode. It hits just too many “family values” issues for them. Anyone want to take bets on abstinence-only sex ed being mentioned on the air on CNN within the next twelve hours?
2 peter Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 1:13 pm
I completely agree that “Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy is a private matter.” It has zero bearing on her ability to be VP.

Two other things have come to light which do, however, relate to her ability to be VP.

She is opposed to abortion even in cases or rape, incest, or saving the life of the mother. This is the most extreme anti-choice position there is: you can’t be more extreme without being Randall Terry. The meme that disaffected Hillary supporters will flock to Palin simply because she is a woman seems highly dubious.

Her portrayal as an enemy of pork is also dubious. As mayor of Wasilla, she boasted about how successful she was in getting earmarks for her town. Her proclamation that she opposed the Bridge to Nowhere is misleading: she was quoted on several occasions strongly supporting the bridge during the appropriations process. Once it became an object of ridicule, she declined the bridge but kept the money and used it for other pork projects. So she was for it before she was against it.

Hopefully the debate will concern substance and not tabloid accusations, but I wouldn’t count on it.

On a slightly different note, I thought your readers would be interested in the revised schedule for the GOP convention:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/09/01/opinion/20080901_opart.html
3 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Kos is already hitting the ‘abstinence only’ bit…
4 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Her position on abortion relates how exactly to her ability to perform the job of Vice President? You may hate the position, but it’s not in ANY WAY a reflection on her ability to do the job - just an indication that she may choose positions that you do not like…
5 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 1:29 pm
But I do appreciate the graphic - and the fact that it’s done by Christopher Buckley!…
6 peter Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 1:35 pm
The job of Vice President is whatever the President decides it to be. However, she may be President, and her position on abortion is directly relevant to the performance of Presidential functions, such as picking Supreme Court nominees. If she will only nominate Justices with her extremist positions, then she is a poor pick for the job.

While you can draw a distinction between “ability to do the job” and “deeply held convictions,” I think there is an overlap between the two. Even John McCain disagrees with her philosophy, so I doubt many Hillary supporters will come on board.
7 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Well, you know abortion is not my issue - but what you call an ‘extremist’ position is one shared by millions of Americans. They are usually known as conservatives…
8 peter Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 1:49 pm
I think most conservatives (including McCain) would accept abortion to save the life of the mother. Putting the mother’s life in jeopardy to save a fetus is an extremist position. Ditto for rape and incest.

My guess is that there will be a Terri Schiavo - type situation over the next two months where a woman with a life threatening problem pregnancy gets media attention and Palin is forced to advocate her position in a real life situation.
9 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Oh, apologies - I misread her position. Well, if that is her position (as I said, abortion is not my issue), then yeah, that’s more extreme than most conservatives…but it still has nothing to do with her ability to perform the duties of Vice President, just the policies she would choose to pursue. It’s important to be clear on the distinction…I can’t even parse it out, since the difference in this case is definitional - to merely state the distinction is to be argue for it…
10 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 2:07 pm
But let’s be clear on one other thing - we know now, definitively, that McCain preferred Lieberman, but the pro-life faction screamed bloody murder, and he was forced to go with the next closest thing to a game-changer he could come up with.

Now, I would have much preferred Lieberman myself…but if Palin ends up being a bad choice, she’s the choice that McCain was forced to adopt by those who elevate abortion to such a ridiculous high pedestal in presidential politics.

I’ve got no beef with pro-choice Americans, and I’ve got no beef with pro-life Americans, my personal stance on the issue notwithstanding. But I am truly sick that both parties continue to be held hostage over this issue. The fact that a great pick like Joe Lieberman had to be passed over because of this one issue is appalling…
11 peter Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 2:08 pm
I think that the bifurcation of ability to do the job and policies one would pursue is a distinction without a difference: they are equally important.

While I think that Bristol Palin’s pregnancy is an irrelevant distraction, it does create an opening for the Obama campaign. Now that McCain has produced an ad starring Britney Spears, would you object if the Obama campaign creates an ad with Jamie Lynn Spears?

(Just kidding. I think I know the answer.)
12 peter Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 2:11 pm
Re post 10: you are in sync with an article in today’s Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/01/us/politics/p01caucus.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin
13 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 2:12 pm
They may be equally important, but they are not equivalent. I’m just asking for clarity, not that you downgrade your beliefs one way or another.

I would LOVE to see Obama put out a Jamie Lynn Spears ad…as it would certainly be a boon to my side…but the Obama campaign has not been pushing these Palin rumors, to be fair - it has almost exclusively been liberal bloggers, with Kos being ground zero…
14 peter Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 2:26 pm
What Kos does sounds no different than what the Obama Nation guy does. A pox on both their houses.
15 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Thanks for the link, btw, interesting article…
16 Clint Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 2:59 pm
peter-

I think you’re wrong about Governor Palin’s position on abortion.

You’re right that she opposes it even in the case of rape or incest.

But as far as I can tell, she does not oppose a life-of-the-mother exception.

(see: Alaska Daily News from the gubernatorial election two years ago.)
17 Clint Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Mark-

I have to ask. Why Lieberman?
18 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 3:06 pm
I’m thinking of doing a bigger post on it soon, but short answer - he’s a good friend of McCain’s, he has tons of experience, complementing McCain where Palin hurts him, he’s a good man, and it would have been a perfect fit…
19 peter Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Clint: after a little Googling, I believe that you are correct. I can’t remember where I read that she objected to all three circumstances, but it was not a left wing blog (as I avoid them — no reason to hear what like-minded individuals have to say). Thanks for clarifying this.
20 Gulf Coast Bandit Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Lieberman donated 250K to the DSCC this month (well, I guess last month now). And you want the Republican candidate to choose him to be Vice President? Yeah.
21 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 5:50 pm
I don’t expect every Republican would have been happy with the pick. But it would have been a very bold gamechanger, and it would have provided McCain with a lifelong friend who is strong on experience…and it’s who he wanted…
22 too many steves Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 5:52 pm
If you are pro-life then it is wholly consistent to oppose abortion in the cases of rape and incest. The manner of conception is irrelevant to the value of the unborn child’s life.
23 Gulf Coast Bandit Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 6:28 pm
I can’t think of any Republicans who would be happy with the pick, Mark; the only game it would change is to utterly deflate the base. Palin did the exact opposite.

And because I haven’t said this yet, congratulations to Levi and Bristol on their baby.
24 Chris J. Breisch Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Mark, I think you’re wrong. I don’t think Lieberman was ever seriously considered. In fact, I get the impression that Palin has been the leading candidate for quite some time. More on this in a bit, but I’ve been gone all day and I have quite a bit to catch up on.
25 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Gulf Coast Bandit, I’m a Republican, and I would have liked the pick.

But my point is not that the base would be thrilled with Lieberman, nor that Palin is a bad pick. My point is merely this: when the presidential candidate of either party can’t pick the candidate he or she prefers because of the stance on abortion, we have elevated this issue for beyond where it needs to be.

I’m not saying abortion has no place in politics - I am saying its importance, particularly at the top of the ticket, is all out of proportion…
26 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Chris, I’m seeing numerous reports that Lieberman was McCain’s first choice…
27 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 8:24 pm
For example:

For weeks, advisers close to the campaign said, McCain had wanted to name as his running mate his good friend Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, the Democrat turned independent. But by the end of last weekend, the outrage from Christian conservatives over the possibility that McCain would fill out the Republican ticket with Lieberman, a supporter of abortion rights, had become too intense to be ignored.

With time running out, and after a long meeting with his inner circle in Phoenix, McCain finally picked up the phone last Sunday and reached Palin at the Alaska State Fair. Although the campaign’s polling on McCain’s potential running mates was inconclusive on the selection of Palin — virtually no one had heard of her, a McCain adviser said — the governor, who opposes abortion, had glowing reviews from influential social conservatives.

McCain was comfortable with two others on his short list, Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota and former Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts. But neither was the transformative, attention-grabbing choice McCain felt he needed, top campaign advisers said, to help him pivot from his image as the custodian of the status quo to a change agent like his Democratic rival, Senator Barack Obama.
28 Chris J. Breisch Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Mark,
I was aware of that when I made my last post. I still maintain that Lieberman was never seriously considered. Not sure if I’ll have time to get out the details tonight. Dealing with family stuff.
29 Mark Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Take your time…I’ll check back on the thread tomorrow…
30 Chris J. Breisch Says:
September 1st, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Basically, I think everything you saw the last few weeks in the media from “advisors close the the McCain campaign” etc. regarding the VP selection process was all part of a masterful disinformation campaign designed to confuse the Obama campaign and to keep them off-balance.

More to come when I have more than two minutes to write about it.
31 Fargus Says:
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:44 am
Not that masterful, Chris, given the last couple of days of disclosures about Palin.
32 Chris J. Breisch Says:
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:46 am
Ok, let’s look at the facts, and examine the last 45 days or so of McCain’s campaign.

What have been the biggest movers of those days from McCain? The “celebrity” ads. What was the purpose of those ads? Well, actually there were 5, as I detail here, but one of the biggest was to force Obama to start playing defense and to keep his campaign off-balance. For most of the last 45 days or so, it’s been the McCain campaign controlling the message and the delivery, and that’s how you win elections.

More on that in a bit.

Now, how are VP’s selected? I’ve never been involved in a selection, and I’m sure every candidate does it slightly differently, but if you read up on them, this is the “typical” case. The candidate gets with a few of the people he respects most to talk about it. He throws out a few names, and invites them to throw out a few names. He may even ask them to get with people they trust most and come up with a few names for the next time they get together.

In any event, the same people get together a little later and this time a “list” is formed. We’re not at serious consideration yet, just speculation. At this point, a “pre-vetting” process occurs. People are assigned to go check out the names on the list for any “huge” problems. This isn’t a digging into skeletons, but only a look at well-known information. Did they ever sponsor legislation calling for school bus drivers to be armed with Uzis? Did they get caught by the FBI with $90,000 in cash in their freezer? What are their positions on the major issues of the day and the issues the candidate cares most about.

After this is done, the group gets together again, and they go over the “list”. Some people get crossed off. Now we sort of have the first thing that can be called a “short list”. Now, I’m not saying that Lieberman wasn’t on this list. He may have been, and in fact, very likely was. But there’s still one more necessary step before serious consideration can be given to these people.

They have to be asked if they’re interested in the spot.

Stop and think about that for a minute before reading on.

Candidates don’t have infinite resources. They don’t want to spend a lot of time and money vetting someone who doesn’t want the job. And worse, they don’t want to get to the day before they’re ready to make the announcement and call up their pick and say “we want you” and have the person say, “thanks, but no thanks”.

So, back to that asking part. Everything, and I mean everything, that I have seen, heard, or read about Joe Lieberman is that he would have answered that question with an “emphatic ‘No!’”.

So then, why all the stuff about “would a pro-choice candidate be ok?” and “close advisors talking about Lieberman”? Remember the point earlier about keeping the Obama campaign off-balance and off-message? They forced Obama’s people to take all of these names seriously and do some vetting on their own and to prepare a response. Yes, I’m sure the Obama people didn’t spend a huge amount of time on any of the names coming from McCain, but they spent some. They even created their “thenextcheney” site.

In fact, the Washington Post says that she had been considered for months.

In fact, it now appears likely that one of the prerequisites on McCain’s list was that it be someone who would fit his “maverick” image.

Then came the masterful announcement. I’ve never seen a VP selection that was such a surprise. With Obama, I think most people had settled on Biden several days before hand. His announcement was at 2 pm on a Saturday, and I think most of us went to bed Friday night having already heard that it was Biden. The news started trickling out almost 24 hours ahead of time.

But McCain knew that he had to keep Obama guessing and to keep the Obama-centered media’s focus. The blackout on the selection was amazing, right down to the plane landing in Middleton. It was dumb luck that that was even discovered. I’ve been to Middleton. It’s a tiny town, and that airfield there (I won’t call it an airport) is even smaller. They could’ve landed at easily a dozen sites in Cincinnati, and I’m guessing a half-dozen sites in Dayton, and probably another dozen sites in Columbus, but they chose Middleton to keep it quiet.

And what was the result? Bafflement on the part of the Obama campaign. She wasn’t on “thenextcheney” site. They don’t know how to attack her. Their first knee-jerk reaction was to ridicule her and then were forced to realize how much that showed a lack of class. Their first ad doesn’t even mention her. They have to change their plans for Biden on the debates. And, lets not forget, Obama’s moment of glory, his acceptance speech, lost and forgotten.

Once again, McCain controls the Obama-centric media and controls the message, and keeps Obama off-balance.

Masterful.

Fargus, I’ll get you in the next post, but this one is too long already.
33 Chris J. Breisch Says:
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:54 am
Fargus, which part wasn’t masterful?

The part where they allowed the lefty sites to bring Trig’s Down’s Syndrom to the American consciousness? Or the part where they were “forced” to admit Bristol’s pregnancy and that she’s keeping the child?

Take a step back for a minute. Both of these things are great stories from the right’s perspective. Mom gets pregnant, child is diagnosed with Down’s Syndrome, mom is advised to abort, mom says “no”. Pro-life: CHECK! Teenage un-wed daughter gets pregnant, decides to keep child. Pro-life: CHECK!

Both of these help the McCain campaign with the pro-life right, but are also things the McCain camp doesn’t “want” to talk about, because they don’t want to look like they’re taking political advantage. Now, people that follow things already knew about the Down’s Syndrome child, but America didn’t. Now, thanks to the lefty media and, in particular, the attacks from the lefty blogs, everyone knows. And, to end the discussion about Trig, they’re “forced” to announce the information about Bristol.

Side effect, Palin’s family appears even more “real” and “authentic” than before, which is her strong suit. Second side effect, the first attacks against Palin have been shown to be baseless smears, and in some cases, reek of sexism. This a) garners sympathy for Palin, and b) immediately discredits future attacks.

Which part of that wasn’t masterful?
34 Fargus Says:
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:03 am
The part where she was a member of a secessionist party, fired a public official because he didn’t execute her personal vendettas, lied about being against the “bridge to nowhere,” secured $27 million in federal funds for the tiny town of Wasilla, etc.
35 Chris J. Breisch Says:
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:13 am
Fargus, first two points I responded to on the other thread.
Lied about being against the bridge to nowhere? Why? Because she was for it before she killed it? Please.
Secured $27 million in federal funds for Wasilla? So? I’m guessing if you were a resident of Wasilla, you’d be happy about that. Isn’t that part of a mayor’s job?

Keep firing that shotgun. Eventually the spray will hit something, I’m sure. Just keep it pointed away from your own foot.
36 tjl Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Why did the rumor about a fake pregnancy force the recent revelation about the daughters current pregnancy? If Palin wanted to keep her daughter out of the spotlight why didn’t she just release some medical records to prove that she was not lying? Why drag the daughter in deeper?
37 Chris J. Breisch Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:44 pm
I think it forced the timing more than anything else. They were obviously going to have to release this information at some point. It was fairly well-known back in the hometown, and she’d be 7 months pregnant by election day. They’d either have to lock her up or say something.
38 tjl Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:50 pm
OK Chris B - but if the initial rumor killer was focused on Palin instead of her daughter I think it would have had a positive effect on her campaign, then a day later spill the beans on the current pregnancy. The whole thing seems fishy to me. A McCain Aid saying “about 5 months” seems unnecessarily vague.