Who is Against Bristol Palin?

I haven't seen anyone say that Bristol Palin made a bad choice or is a bad person.

On the other hand, I've seen bloggers point out the irony in a statement from the Palin camp that Bristol's "choice" was her own to make and they respect it. If Sarah Palin and McCain had their way, Bristol would not have any choice in the matter. So why bring it up it at all?

Senator Obama, being very consistent, has said that families are off limits:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/01/obama.pa...

From Senator Obama:

"We don't go after people's families; we don't get them involved in the politics. It's not appropriate, and it's not relevant," he added. "Our people were not involved in any way in this, and they will not be. And if I ever thought that there was somebody in my campaign that was involved in something like that, they'd be fired."

I agree wholeheartedly.

I agree the families are off limits, there are plenty of other examples of Palin's lack of experience and judgement and McCain's lack of proper vetting to use as reasons not to vote for this ticket.
I would just have to ask everyone who agrees with the Malkin/Limbaugh view, if it were one of Obama's daughters, would she get the same free pass? I find that very hard to believe.

Just an observation: there seems to be an abundance of responses on any article that has to do with Palin. Back and forth. Back and forth. I think this is saying something: Democrats are worried about her drawing away votes from Obama.

And they should be. The democrats alienated Clinton and consistently and rudely called her supporters "shrill", "bitter", "whining" and a host of other misogynistic derogatory comments.

Now the other team has picked a woman to potentially slide into the Oval Office should anything go wrong with McSame. And suddenly the dems are realizing how damaging their treatment of Clinton supporters panned out to be..

It was all about the math all along. Everyone would've lined up behind Clinton. Only a lesser percentage was guaranteed to do the same with Obama. It was a bad gamble and now the pinch is being felt a la Palin.

Just an observation: there seems to be an abundance of responses on any article that has to do with Palin. Back and forth. Back and forth.

Speaking purely for myself, the entire thing is endlessly fascinating because of how unexpected and reckless it seems. Obama and Hillary don't really enter it to it at all.

No, they just called people who said things like Sil writes shrill, bitter and whining. And they're right. Fortunately, none of those phrases describe the overwhelming majority of Clinton supporters who have now moved on just as she has asked them to.

I'm with Chris on this. It isn't even about Palin.

I think this was pretty reckless of McCain.

Palin herself is a public figure.

But the daughter ought to be off limits.

Don't worry. The Obama supporters will keep digging up stuff on her to rag about.

Instinctively, they know they've got to.. Like I said, even among the people I speak to, about 50% support Obama, 50% Palin/McCain (in that order). I don't know what all of them are thinking, but many are still offended, rightly so, about continuing sexist comments.

That being said, I've long suspected that "Obama' supporters are really GOP people injecting derisive and divisive comments against Clinton supporters exactly for the purpose of alienating more Clinton supporters over to McCain.

I'd bet the house on it.. So the "BigOil owns the GOP" issue (how are those bumper stickers coming along?..lol..) and the GOP inserts are pissing me off enough to vote for Obama/Biden.

Agreed, this isn't as much about Palin as it is McCain. If he was president, what other impulsive decisions would he make? And Kathryn, you make a good point. I think most of us know the answer to your hypothetical scenario.

Seeing Obama take the higher ground and requesting that others do the same doesn't surprise me a bit.

I don't know what all of them are thinking, but many are still offended, rightly so, about continuing sexist comments.

I noticed you don't actually point to any sexist comments. Links are your friend...

Everything I have read says that the information about Bristol's pregnancy was issued to stop internet rumors about Trig being Bristol's child instead of Sarah's. Wouldn't there have been any number of OTHER ways the rumor could have been refuted? Producing medical or hospital records, a delivery physicians statement, pictures of Sarah in hospital holding Trig, etc. , would have been a far less intrusive refutation. Why was it decided the BEST answer was to reveal this child's (Bristol's) pregnancy?

I agree with the other comments that this isn't about Palin, but rather it is about McCain.

Just turn on MSNBC & CNN to get sexist condescension from leftists who pour scorn on Palin's BELIEFS as well as her credentials, which happen to exceed both Obama's & Biden's as far as executive experience.

And Carville had the gall to bring up Hillary C. in comparison, as if being elected on the coattails of a cheatin' Bubba was more "legitimate" than being elected a state governor and being an expert on energy oil and gas way beyond any Dem candidate---remember that energy issue, anybody?

And then to compare Obama's ginormous foreign policy experience [ForRelCte EUR subcte chair who has called ZERO meetings since he began running for POTUS. ] Obama is a show horse, Palin is a work horse. Biden is too old & really not half the ForRelCte chairman Sen. Lugar was.

Methinks the flailing and ridiculous allegations by leftists about Palin's fifth child demonstrate just who the DESPERATE crazies are in the race.

And as for those fingerpointing Bristol Palin, Taylor Marsh, Echidne, Pollitt at the Nation and Ann Friedman plus other crones screeching and shrieking about Bristol Palin as well as Gov. Palin's beliefs & qualifications. McCain did his due diligence and Palin is more qualified than Biden on energy issues and she's certainly too smart to plagiarize another pol's remarks. Total hypocrisy as usual on the left, but louder and stupider than usual.

She certainly does scare corrupt earmarkers like Pelosi, Reid, Boxer, and Murtha! Their crony corruption reeks so badly they have lowered Congressional approval to 9%, one third of GWB's!!

Just keeping things in perspective.

Dave - many of your posts contain interesting arguments, but they are overwhelmed by your use of name-calling and insults. Since your opinion differs from many of the posters here I would like to see it expressed, but perhaps tone it down? For instance:

"And Carville had the gall to bring up Hillary C. in comparison, as if being elected on the coattails of a cheatin' Bubba was more "legitimate" than being elected a state governor and being an expert on energy oil and gas way beyond any Dem candidate---remember that energy issue, anybody?"

...could have just as easily been expressed in the following way without the insults, which would give your arguments more credibility:

"Carville is now comparing Hillary C and Palin. Would Clinton be a national figure had she not been married to the President? I fail to see how Palin's self-made rise to governor is any less notable. In addition, she is an expert on energy oil and gas with considerably more knowledge than any Democratic candidate.

I agree ryan. And the funny thing is the daveinboca was praising Hillary Clinton incessantly during the primaries. Now he "goes after" Senator Clinton (via Carville's remark)?

Politics! Sheesh!

I don't know about you, but I only read the comments section for the shrill, bitter whining. Beats almost anything on cable tv.

Daveinboca-- If Biden at 65 is too old--- what does that say about McCain at 72???

Check and mate!

LOL @ Jazz's comment.

I don't even read Boca Dave's posts any more. Dave, don't try to insult the people you're tying to persuade.

The hypocrisy of the Left (notably in the media) was predictable. One is a traitor if one doesn't conform to the (PC, Democratic Party) model that all objects of past liberal and Democratic Party efforts on their behalf, that is the only true way, forever.

If this were a liberal or Dem's daughter (Alexandra Pelosi, let us say), it would be _always_ off limits. (Obama has to be careful given the circumstances under which he was conceived.) And if a lib's gal were impregnated, it would be no surprise if Levi Johnston would be the new star-stud in this nation, lauded at the Dem convention, maybe even appearing with the girl in question, plus Britney Spears's sister, and _her_ child's father on stage. (Not to mention _People_ magazine...)

Dave in Boca: Biden was the best choice for Obama, as it fills in the biggest of the holes Obama brings with him -- the concerns about foreign policy, of which Obama has _zero_ experience. (Meanwhile, Palin has more executive experience, which counts more than the Senate time that qualifies one as being "experienced in Washington," the very thing Obama fans decry and are happy about his lacking, as it means freshening, cleansing Change, while Obama has none.)

Where Biden gets lower marks are with ethics, and what of his relatives and their ethical problems? (Biden's son and brother are suspected of hedge-fund fraud, and Biden may be tied to Rezko. Hmmm.) (The other "entertaining" thing about Biden other than his hair is that he instinctively flashes a grinny grin at any camera he sees, with faster reaction doing this than Bill Clinton seemed to have. Plaigarism and partisan-hit-man action are simply additional items that surface from time to time.)

It's my hope that despite his defects and his dullness, McCain with Palin offers us a reasonable hope of reform in Washington, real reform that includes spending reductions, that action which those perpetuating the problem in Washington abhor.

DLS- If you're going in the direction of ethics don't forget that McCain was one of the Keating Five and was censured by the investigating committee for his role in the scandal.

And don't forget that he was not guilty of any wrongdoing, but he criticized himself about the affair and that was when McCain the reformer came into being due to his same at that association.

In other words he learned from a mistake as a young Senator and turned a bad thing into a good one. Now Obama is that young Senator, do we want him making such rookie mistakes in the Oval Office?