It occurs to me the G. O. P. wants things both ways and always to favor them. They were quick to trot out the tragic Downs child of Mrs. Palin. My what a wonderful person. She is the "perfect" running mate as John McCain said.
She has a litter of kids, is ultra conservative, is Pro-life with a personal tragedy to prove it. She has strong family values, is a life long member of the National Rifle Association, promotes hunting of Alaskan big game. She is young to balance John being old. Female to draw Clinton supporters.
Oops. There is a matter of a 17 year old daughter who is pregnant. She must be a Democrat, because Republicans don't have sex. But that should be off limits. Kids should not be political targets.
I couldn't agree more. They shouldn't have paraded the Downs child out either. I think it is unscrupulous to have played that card also. The IQ, health and activities of their children are not political fodder. It should have been more than enough to have said she has five children. End of story.
Palin's 17 year old should be allowed
her privacy. She needs her mothers and her fathers love, support and reassurance. I would think that she is resentful that her mother has caused the public display of her indiscretion. It would be like having your mother telling the world, on the evening news, that you had a crush on
Billy or indelicately told of her first period.
I don't think it is
all the fault of her mother. The media bears a huge responsibility for this. They should have known that this girl had no part in the battle and NEEDS her privacy. If they were to perform their due diligence in the investigation of the candidate there are either other issues in her past to indicate her quality of parenting, managing or life style or there is nothing to discredit her. They should have dug deeper, they should have dug somewhere else.
This is just my opinion, but I don't think the media should keep harping on this girl. They should be looking at the lies about Palin's
green record, the lies about her ear mark record. The conduct of her office of mayor, her conduct as governor of Alaska. How big a deal is Alaska. She hired lobbyists as mayor of Podunk (pop. 8000) to secure $11 million in earmarks. Hmm, $1375 for every man, woman and child. As the governor she refused an ear mark of $300+ million for the infamous 'bridge to nowhere'. Yeah! Isn't she an agent of change and a stand up governor? Well, she did keep the money, just not the bridge project. Technically 'she' didn't keep the money, she had Alaska keep the money.
At least we only have two months to endure the campaign rhetoric and sort out enough facts to make an intelligent decision. Let's hope there are no lurking skeletons in the closets to break the hearts of the voters.
