QUOTE: And when did it start being OK to be using a candidates (especially underage) children against them in such a vile and personal way? SNL caught flack for doing something on Chelsea Clinton over a decade ago, and recently, even now that she's a grown woman, NBC caught hell for so much as saying she was being 'pimped out' (gosh... "Those kids and their new, hip lingo") for her mom's campaign. It's not Governor Palin who's becoming a punchline, it's her 17 year old daughter. Poor form, regardless of which side is doing it.

I'm a bit torn on this one, personally.

On the one hand, it certainly makes sense to keep a candidate's family off of the proverbial table.

On the other hand, when the candidate in question (and her running mate/potential "boss") are both propontents of "abstinence only" programs serving as sex education, to have that candidate's underage daughter get pregnant serves as a bit of a spotlight on the candidate's position.  "So...how'd that 'abstinence only' education turn out for your family?"

On the other hand, when the candidate in question (and her running mate/potential "boss") are both propontents of "abstinence only" programs serving as sex education, to have that candidate's underage daughter get pregnant serves as a bit of a spotlight on the candidate's position.  "So...how'd that 'abstinence only' education turn out for your family?"

Todd, I see your point...but also, her daughter's case is just one particular instance. It certainly isn't appropriate (or even useful) to use that as proof against "abstinence only."  It would be like if Palin had a family member killed in a car accident while wearing a seatbelt. It doesn't prove that wearing a seatbelt is a bad practice.  With that in mind, I don't think it's relevant enough to warrant bringing her daughter into the debate.

Michael: your posts raised some very interesting points! You definitely gave me some things to mull over. Well done.

"but rather Senator Obama's "judgement" question which she highlights.  Governor Palin is an example of sure judgement with regard to selection of a possible Vice-President of the United States of America?  Or, a flawed calculation based on nothing so much as immediate campaign needs?"

Bingo.

Politicians are professional hypocrites, and in this case the hypocrisy came back to bite.

Not really in this case.

If it's off-limits, why are the Republicans trying to spin it as a positive?

**************************

As opposed to....? How are they supposed to spin it? I suppose correct PR would be "Y'know, I guess she is a slut after all... Anywho, back to the issues...."

The original 'spin' was that Palin's Down Syndrome baby wasn't her's and that it was her daughters. And there are those nutjobs out there who are still looking for that nugget to be true, despite their inability to do math when calculating delivery dates vs. expecting dates for her daughter.