An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« Quote Of The Day: The Defense of Sarah Palin

Shotgun Wedding »

The Vile Stench of Holy Hypocrisy: Mommy Palin, Family Values & Sexual Politics

Posted by SHAUN MULLEN, TMV Columnist in At TMV.
Sep 3rd, 2008 | Comments

I would normally defer to Barack Obama’s view that candidates’ families are off limits, something that right-wing bloviators have not afforded his wife. But Sarah Palin deserves no such consideration because this gun-packing, gay-bashing hypocrite of a mommy has made so-called family values a centerpiece of her politics, inevitably shining a harsh light on wayward daughter Bristol, a precocious 17-year-old whose hormones answered the siren call of premarital sex.

The mere thought that Palin and the right-wing Christianists who have the Republican Party by the short-and-curlies believe that they can tell my children what they can and cannot do with their bodies, let alone use proven methods to prevent pregnancy and sexually-transmitted diseases, is outrageous. That they believe that the government should never help pay for these proven methods is awful enough, but Governor Palin’s line-item veto of a bill that to slash funding for a state program benefiting teen mothers in need of a place to live is obscene.

But if you are a septuagenarian like John McCain, not only is Viagra okay, but the government should pay for your penis-emboldening prescription so you can screw a woman who under family values law must do the man’s bidding and is forbidden any kind of protection not matter her age or level of maturity. If that isn’t predatory sex, I don’t know what is.

That these culture warriors use their God as an adjustable wrench that can be dialed back and forth to fit political expedience is simply amazing. Exhibit A du jour: What Bristol Palin did would be considered immoral if her mother wasn’t a Christianist spear carrier.

The shame of all this sexual politicking is that all of a sudden the knocked-up Bristol Palin is growing up way too fast in a media bubble, another victim of the adjustable wrench crowd’s demand that abstinence-only education be not just their law, but the law of the land.

Bristol is getting married because that is mandatory under family values law. Never mind that she is said to not love the father and the father doesn’t want kids, two strikes against a successful marriage if there ever were ones.

Bible thumpers like Sarah Palin are extraordinarily screwed up in their own right. Palin also gets extra points for the most un-Christian habit of lying. But her and their intolerance and fanaticism is elevated to another plane because of how they prey on women, and especially the young and innocent.

Photograph by Clark James Mischler/Getty Images

Ads by Project Wonderful! Your ad here, right now: $0

jwest

Do you think TMV might get a mention on “Morning Joe” tomorrow as one of those internet “hate sites”?

superdestroyer

Of course, Shawn does not see any problem with Democratic candidates taking millions from teachers unions while their own children attended non-union elite private schools. And of course, Shawn does not see any problem with Democratic candidates supporting diversity programs that put kids on buses for hours to attend ghetto school while their own children attend schools that are 85% white and Asian. And of course, Shawn does not see any problem with the Democrats supporting race based affirmative action while the elite still send their idiot children to the Ivy leagues.

I guess Shawn has just given up the idea of having credibilty when speaking on the issues. I guess having been around the block a few times in a big, deep blue city had blinded him to the hypocracy of the left.

BBQ

Hmm, seems the only ones making a big deal about this is the left. Also it's pretty comical that Shaun talks about acting adult since his posts are constant reminders of how childish he is.

CStanley

Ah, the sweet smell of panic.

Rudi

Good to see the TownHall crowd out in force.

Leonidas

Another hit piece from Shaun, the immoderate voice.

*yawn*

Manchester2

That's Shaun Mullen, not Shawn, and "hypocracy" is spelled "hypocrisy." There's much wrong with Mr. Mullen's post, so it's a shame to let little mistakes like that distract from the critique of his broadside. I'd start with this paragraph, in very poor taste by any standards:

"But if you are a septuagenarian like John McCain, not only is Viagra okay, but the government should pay for your penis-embolding script so you can screw a woman who under family values law must do the man’s bidding and is forbidden any kind of protection not matter her age or level of maturity. If that isn’t predatory sex, I don’t know what is."

Why the vitriol from Mr. Mullen and many others? Because Gov. Palin and her family story will resonate with thousands of American families that have been through similar situations, and that may translate into more votes on Nov. 4. What irks the Dems is how twice in just a few days she has thrown the spotlight on better choices. How so? First, here's a couple who kept their Down's Syndrome baby when according to MSNBC.com unborn children with this condition are usually aborted at an 80% rate. Now, a pregnant daughter will do the old-fashioned thing and marry the father of her child who - as we've all noticed - is crassly referred to by some as the "babby daddy," "sperm donor," etc. A shot-gun wedding? Perhaps, though friends of Mr. Johnston say that they had discussed marriage before Miss Palin became pregnant.

Call it a political ploy if you want, but Miss Palin's fiancé will be on-hand at the convention for Gov. Palin's speech on Wednesday night. Remember, Sen. McCain knew of this before he chose Palin as his running-mate. You can dub that poor judgment if you want; I'm betting more will call the whole thing a humanizing factor, i.e. "she's one of us."

Capt_Fogg

Just keep attacking, right? Just keep saying left and liberal and nobody will notice you're covered with dungt and stinking to high heaven.

Opposing sex education is a big deal, opposing birth control is a big deal, slashing funds to provide temporary shelter for teen mothers without families to turn to is a big deal and a bigger deal from someone who has expressed a desire to remove the US constitution and replace it with "Biblical Law."

Right wing blowhards were all over Chelsea Clinton for absolutely nothing other than nastiness, so blow it out your infected hoo hoo.

If it is indeed only opposed by this mysterious "left" than so much the more disgraceful it is for those who support her party. She's against any and all environmental legislation - that's a big deal. She has in the past advocated the secession of Alaska from the United States - that's a big deal. She claims not to know anything about the war in Iraq - that's a scandal. McCain asserts that he knows nothing about economics - that's a big deal if you give a damn about America, which you obviously don't.

You can continue to try to distract from discussing the baldfaced lies and obvious incompetence of your candidates by mewling about unspecified and largely invented "lefties" or you can wake up and take the last chance we will have to save this country. But then I'm assuming you're a patriot and not an idiot insurgent and that's not clear.

AustinRoth

You are debasing yourself again Shaun, but par for the course.

Really, did they kick you out of DU for being too far to the left and too vile?

elrod

Shaun,
Why did you put that photoshop picture up? It completely undermines your post.

I agree this is over the top, and I'm a hard-core Obama supporter.

Leonidas

The vile stench of a Shaun hitpiece is what we have here.

shaun

Elrod:

Agreed.

Polimom

Shaun, I'm glad you pulled that photo. It's getting more than enough play already.

CStanley

so blow it out your infected hoo hoo.

LOL, boy, I guess some of us really have egg on our faces now. How silly of us to 'attack'. Glad that Capt. Fogg set us straight by showing us how serious discourse and civil debate should be handled.

StockBoySF

"Never mind that she is said to not love the father and the father doesn’t want kids, two strikes against a successful marriage if there ever were ones."

I have no idea whether this is true or not. I do like the fact that Bristol and the father of her child are taking responsibility and marrying, but call me naïve when I assume that two people marry each other because they love one another and take sacred vows to honor God.

Even though I have no proof of Bristol and boyfriend being forced to marry, I suspect it is true, especially given his nickname- isn't it "Sex on Skates" or something similar? Guys with nicknames like that aren't looking to settle down.

The religious right does not believe in sex education (except what they want to tell their own kids) but does believe in abstinence-only contraception. It should come as no surprise when kids who are not given proper and full information make mistakes.

It’s a sin (to use religious right language) to have sex out of wedlock (though I know very few people who actually wait until they are married to have sex). But somehow in the eyes of the religious right all is forgiven if the woman gets pregnant and marries the father, taking the most sacred of vows before the world and God, even if they do not love each other and can not honor those vows. Is that a sin, too? And in the case of Bristol and boyfriend if they are being forced into marriage, it’s even more horrible that two people are forced to marry for the political gain of one of the parents.

And of course when two people do love each other, do want to take sacred vows and do have every intent on honoring those vows, the religious right wants to pass constitutional bans to prevent them from doing so… claiming that it will undermine their own marriages and society.

These are the so-called family values that the religious right believes should be the rule of the land?

It's one thing for families to make gut-wrenching decisions and those decisions should be private. But it's another thing to make decisions based on a poltical necessity. Once a decision is for political purposes, then that decision is subject to a more public scrutiny...

StockBoySF

Shaun, thanks for pulling the photo, if it really is photoshopped. If it's an actual photo, then you have every right to post it. Let's not muddle up the debate by posting false information....

Rudi

Seems to be plenty of dung slinging going on by both sides in the comments. Why not discus the issues or polls, found this over at Hit & Run:
http://www.reason.com/convention2008/show/12850...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/la...
Obama Gets Separation: Convention Bounce or Palin Thud?

Radley Balko | September 2, 2008, 12:29pm

The snapshot below is from RealClearPolitics' summary of the latest tracking polls. Obama seems to have opened up his biggest lead since the primaries ended.

Whether that was positive reaction to his speech and the DNC coverage or negative reaction to McCain's VP selection I guess remains to be seen.
...

Why no mention of this poll news?

GreenDreams

Whew, Shaun. My screen is still smokin from this post. I share your outrage about the hypocrisy, but could have predicted the response of the increasingly right-leaning crowd here. I could also have predicted that none of them would actually give any defense on the substance of your post.

Gov. Palin and her family are a PERFECT national display of how abstinence-only sex ed doesn't work. It leads to increased teen pregnancies, increased abortions and miserable forced marriages. The hypocrisy is also palpable when Palin and others praise Bristol's decision to keep her baby, or Palin to keep her Down's syndrome child, while simultaneously pressing to prevent anyone else from HAVING a choice.

Good points, StockBoy, as always.

The Christianists pick and choose from the Bible and make their own issues outside of scripture as if it is scriptural. Abortion is not mentioned in the Bible and the earliest church proclamations about it were based on "Thou shalt not kill". Contraception is not forbidden in the Bible. I'm not a big fan of the ancient text, especially its intrusion into our secular affairs. But speaking of affairs, according to the bible, both McCain and Bristol should be stoned to death. Watch how far you want to take this theocracy thing....

AustinRoth

"the increasingly right-leaning crowd here"

Oh dear God, that was truly funny. I LOVE the left reaction to being called out - "WE ARE BEING OVERRUN BY THE RIGHT!"

BTW - what, exactly, is hypocritical about a pro-life mother praising her daughter's decision to keep her baby? That one makes zero sense whatsoever as an argument, as I see it at least. Praising her for getting an abortion would be hypocritical.

And I assume, GD, that schools (and parents) that do promote condom use NEVER have a teenage pregnancy? I mean, that has been the norm in inner-city schools for some time now, and I am glad to hear we have elimated the teen pregnancy problem there. Again, the hypocrisy is just killing me! My sides ache from the laughter.

FYI - to prevent the ad hominum attacks that will be forthcoming, I do believe in early birth control (which I implemented with my own daughter), full sex education in school, etc.

I just find the charges that of you don't, and a pregnancy occurs, that was the sole reason an argument stupid beyond words.

ChrisWWW

AR,
Jwest, BBQ and Leonidas are recent additions to the roster, and they seem to be completely incapable of logical discourse. They're like talking points robots.

GreenDreams

AR, I'm not playing victim here. I don't care who joins and comments on this blog. You've been around long enough to know that the quality of discourse used to be better. Take a look at the quality of comments at TPM for instance. Many commenters there do research, post links and discuss policy. It's all talking points and snark here these days.

I commend you for being a responsible parent. I am not saying that abstinence only sex ed caused the pregnancy, nor that any other form absolutely prevents it. I am saying that we need rational policies to address our problems, not rigid ideologies based on cherry-picking Biblical passages. There is plenty of evidence that abstinence only sex ed increases teen pregnancies and STDs. The American Pediatrics Association report underscores the problems with teen pregnancies (900,000 a year, higher than any modern nation). It's author says, "Even though there is great enthusiasm in some circles for abstinence-only interventions, the evidence does not support abstinence-only interventions as the best way to keep young people from unintended pregnancy,"

Poll after poll show that 2/3 of Americans do not favor the anti-abortion position (they support Roe v Wade), and >80% oppose elimination of sex ed from school or banning contraception.

THEREFORE, trying to implement these policies is anti-democratic. In this democratic republic, your team is trying to force the minority position on the majority. THAT is stupid beyond words. That is hypocrisy for the GOP that pays lip service to democracy but wants to overturn the will of the majority.

AustinRoth

Chris -

I haven't read too much of BBQ's posts yet, but I will grant you jwest and leonidas. Sil is fairly new too (at least by my standards here at TMV), and he is worse than all of them combined.

ChrisWWW

AR,
I'm not complaining either. I just wanted to point out why the perception of a rightward shift isn't batsh** crazy.

AustinRoth

GD - so, implementing any policy that the majority of voters do not agree with is un-Democratic?

Careful with that one - could come back to bite the Democrats. For instance, on ANWAR and/or offshore drilling, school prayer, the death penalty, just to name a few quick ones.

Leonidas

Hmm..... I've expressed a different opinion so I must be a robot? and incapablre of logical discourse? I've backed up several of my post with links and figures so I'm sorry if you can't show the courtesy of a discussion of those and attribute it to some mindless discouse. No much easier to call those who disagree with you names, thats very logical and humane of you Chris.

Let me tell ya a little bit about this right-leaner:

Times voting for George W. Bush (R) 0 (voted Nader twice)
Times voting for John Spratt (D) 4 (each of the last 4 elections)
Times voting for Lindsey Graham (R) 1
Times voting for Jim Demint (R) 0 (voted for Inez Tenenbaum (D))
Times voting for Strom Thurmond (R) 1
Times voting for Fritz Hollings (D) 1

Times working on a Republican campaign 3 (1992,(Bush Sr.) 2000 (McCain) 2008 (McCain)
Times working on a Democratic campaign 2 (2004, 2006 (John Spratt)

So yeah I'm I'm a right leaning moderate, called a RINO by many Republican friends jokingly and not some wingnut. Sorry if being a right-leaning moderate makes me a mindless robot in your book, but you might just want to expand your reading list a bit .

ChrisWWW

Thanks Leo :-)

GreenDreams

"GD - so, implementing any policy that the majority of voters do not agree with is un-Democratic? "

Of course. By definition, unless they want something that is unconstitutional.

And if they want to amend the Constitution, well then that would be a democratic choice too. Of course, the Constitution does have protections against "the tyranny of the majority", or I suppose we would have a country without Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, agnostic or atheist citizens. Fundamentalists believe all of them are going to hell.

As for ANWR and offshore drilling, those polls are driven by dishonest questions. For instance, what if we asked "should we require oil companies to drill for oil when we give them oil leases?" and "should they be given more federal land before developing what we've already given them?" I believe Republicans would be bitten. Or how about these: "should millionaires get a tax cut or should YOU?" "should companies that cause toxic spills be required by law to clean them up?"

So I'm not talking about abusing poll results. Most people know little about ANWR, how much oil is there, the cost of pipelines and spills, the impact on pump prices. But they do understand the importance of contraception, as do YOU. And they are clear that their daughters' medical decisions should not be made in Washington.

Leonidas

No problem Chris,

Glad you could see the point and won't be so quick to stereotype in the future. I confess to being a bit guilty of it myself as I didn't expect you to be appreciative of my reminder and expected a different reply. I humbly apologize for my assumption that you would be close-minded.

CStanley

Greendreams: I could also have predicted that none of them would actually give any defense on the substance of your post.

Gov. Palin and her family are a PERFECT national display of how abstinence-only sex ed doesn't work.

Since there wasn't any actual substance to Shaun's post, there's not a whole lot there to respond to. But since you brought up what you believe to be a substantive argument, GD, I'll respond by reminding you that no, she and her daughter do not prove that abstinence only sex ed doesn't work. If it turns out that her school did have comprehensive sex ed (which, by the way, looks like it may be the case- I guess Gov. Palin hadn't had time yet to revamp all the state's curricula to include Bible study, Creationism, and abstinence only sex ed yet LOL), would you then feel that Bristol Palin's pregnancy was proof that that policy doesn't work?

Statistically there's evidence that abstinence only education isn't any better than comprehensive sex ed, but anecdotal cases of teen pregnancies don't prove a thing (except how debasing our political discussions have become.)

RememberNovember

Manchester-
Call it a political ploy if you want, but Miss Palin's fiancé will be on-hand at the convention for Gov. Palin's speech on Wednesday night. Remember, Sen. McCain knew of this before he chose Palin as his running-mate. You can dub that poor judgment if you want; I'm betting more will call the whole thing a humanizing factor, i.e. "she's one of us."

That's exactly what it is. Elrod posted a succinct analysis of McCains 11th hour choice/crap shoot.
She is not "One of us" in any way shape or form. McCain knew of this maybe a day after he asked. Typical reckless crap-shooting John McCain. Reverse party polarity and they'd be alllllll over Obama. Profligate hypocrisy. Do you go Moose hunting? Forget to list a 20% stake in a car wash on your 1040/and or forget to file the proper annual paperwork? Fire public officials because you don't want them closing bars 3 hours earlier so less drunk drivers on the road? She is petty, vindictive and blunt headed- perfect grist for Karl Rove's mill of lies- bringing her pregnant daughter and her own child on stage as props. Pathetic.
Michelle Malkin referred to Mrs. Obama as Barack's "Baby Mama", so put that in your 10-gauge sodbuster, Mr./Mrs short term memory loss.
She is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Make no mistake.

AustinRoth

GD - so, if polls don't agree with your world view, they are either misleading or describing something unconstitutional?

The death penalty? Nope, sorry, Constitutional.

ANWAR drilling? Pew (50%), Zogby (59%) Quinnipiac (53%)
Offshore drilling? Zogby (74%), CNN (66%+), Rasmussen (67%), Gallup (57%) Quinnipiac (60%)

I guess ALL of them don't know how to ask the question properly. How would you phrase it, "Do you favor killing wildlife and destroying our coastlines to needlessly drill for oil that won't help gas prices?"

Again, careful what you wish for.

School prayer - I should have been clearer. 82% of Americans support a Constitutional Amendment supporting school prayer. SO, the failure to put an Amendment forth to the states is anti-Democratic, based on your comment earlier.

kritt11

AR- If the amendment passes, then I'll support it.

DLS

Shaun, you're outdoing yourself in the stench department these days. Are you getting worried that the race is getting more close now between the tortoise and the Messiah?

Too bad.

DLS

"I LOVE the left reaction to being called out - 'WE ARE BEING OVERRUN BY THE RIGHT!'"

Just as we hear that, and worse, when Fox doesn't join the lib-Dem media goose-step 100% of the time.

As for abstinence, how does any whining to childish to hysterical to stench- and hate-filled anti-religious bigot and non-liberal-hating lefty user (probably angry that the GOP convention is actually newsworthy and good speeches have actually been made and it's getting attention while Obama's Nuremberg Night afterglow has been neutered) know what Palin discussed with and taught her daughter?

DLS

"Praising her for getting an abortion would be hypocritical."

My earlier remark this week still is a round- if not match-winner.

Obama's mother was unwed when she conceived him. Are the abortion-obscessed lunatics on the left glad that their beloved Messiah was permitted to develop to term instead of being aborted?

BAM! ... thud

BBQ

Like I said Chris I have been mostly a lurker for four years. Occasionally would post as Bob but that's almost like posting as anonymous. I definitely lean right but I guess you can say I agree with the Dutch Lads as Rudi calls them when it comes to Shaun.

I think there is ton of fair criticism of this pick but I think some has been downright mean spirited. I have also thought Obama has had many nasty things said about him. And like Clinton I think their has been a little bit of sexism involved with the Palin comments.

As for whether I am a GOP robot. Here is my voting record.
Clinton-D, Nader-G, Bush-R (Edwards-D primary)
Feingold-D twice
Thompson-L Gubernatorial Wisconsin
Magnum-R Congress
Price-D Congress
Locally I have voted for Greens, Dems, and Republicans.

I will vote for Emerson-R Congress, Nixon-D Gov, Koster-D AG, McCain-R Pres.

GreenDreams

OK, CS, thanks for a shred of substance here. We don't know about the quality of Bristol's schooling in the tiny town of Wasilla. I do assume though that Bristol was not allowed to have contraceptives and was counseled fervently by her mom about abstinence and no doubt got that message very consistently in church. Even with what I assume would be the most committed parenting in this regard, she became pregnant. And by a guy who doesn't want kids (according to his MySpace page) and describes himself as "sex on skates".

The point is that adolescents have raging hormones, they act on them, and our country has higher rates of both teen pregnancy and abortion than countries that are more open about contraception. Teens don't always do what mommy, the school or the church say. Very few Americans oppose contraception availability or use. Yes, by all means, let's keep highlighting Palin's opposition not only to a teen's but a grown woman's access to contraception.

900,000 teen pregnancies a year. That's not good. Twice the rate of premies, infant death and other complications. Do you want practical solutions or ideology? Furthermore, studies show that teaching contraception and making it available do not increase teen sex. It just reduces teen pregnancy, abortion, miscarriage and death. That's all.

DLS, I'm not saying anyone should be "aborted". Get a grip. I'm saying it's an individual decision within limits, and that outlawing it does harm to public health.

GreenDreams

AR, you can spin my words any way you please. I didn't claim any particular thing was unconstitutional. I wrote the sentence without qualification that whatever the public wants it can have in a democracy, but had to recognize that it does have to be constitutional. I wasn't claiming that drilling or killing was.

So. Would you support the death penalty for judges and juries and prosecutors who wrongfully convict and execute someone? Better include the governor, prison officials, anyone who commits this murder. Fair's fair, an eye for an eye, a lethal injection for a wrongful lethal injection. Well?

No American supports wrongful or accidental execution. The problem with the death penalty is that it is irrevocable and our court system makes mistakes. What if those who support the death penalty are held accountable to their God for these mistakes? Still OK? Well, that's their problem. And yours.

AustinRoth

I am SO much more of a support of the death penalty than you might guess. Yes, as with murder, if you can show and prove pre-meditation to wrongfully convict and execute an innocent man, than I would love to see them face the death penalty. Then you would really see deterrence in action. And frankly, there would be some scared as crap judges and prosecutors here in Texas in particular.

blog comments powered by Disqus