Bristol Palin
By Jennifer J. Foster
And speaking of the Political Ticker, I’m surprised there was any room for anything else on it, what with all the blah-blah-blah about Bristol Palin and her—GASP!!—pregnancy.
In case you were in a cave somewhere:
1. Sarah Palin is John McCain’s VP pick.
2. Bristol Palin is Todd and Sarah Palin’s 17-year-old daughter.
3. The McCain campaign released news today that Bristol Palin is five months pregnant.
That’s it.
Actually, that’s not it. I was going to blog about a rumor involving Bristol Palin yesterday, but I thought I would wait and do it for the first of the week. I’m so glad I did.
The rumor was that Bristol Palin, not Sarah Palin, was actually the mother of four-month-old Trig Palin, and that Sarah Palin had assumed maternity for the baby in some desperate attempt to cover up the “scandal.“ The rumor, complete with “corroborating details” like, “Bristol was inexplicably absent from school for four months leading up to April!“ and pictures of Bristol with captions like, “Look at her ‘baby bump!‘“ was being promulgated on, among other sites, Daily Kos.
(You know, they should rename that site. “Daily Gross” would fit the content so much better.)
Now, here’s a shocker: The rumor wasn’t true.
Sarah Palin and the McCain campaign confirmed Bristol Palin’s current pregnancy in part to address these disgusting rumors, which began percolating this weekend. My first thought when I heard the news dispelling the rumor was, “Wow, I bet those idiots at Daily Kos really feel like jerks now.“
But then it occurred to me: They probably don’t feel like jerks, because anyone who would spread a rumor like this about a 17-year-old girl must not have a conscience at all.
They are, however, apparently susceptible to embarrassment: The Daily Kos page dealing with this rumor has (shockingly!) disappeared. It is—at least, for now—available in Google cache. I will also post its contents here in a separate post.
To Barack Obama’s tremendous credit, he has come to the Palin family’s defense, reiterating his earlier statement that families of the candidates are off limits, and children are “especially off limits.“ He also reacted to a statement from a McCain aide that Obama’s name is in some of the posts, “in a way that certainly juxtaposes themselves against their ‘campaign of change.‘“
SIDEBAR: What a stupid thing for that McCain aide to say. Is he really insinuating that the Obama campaign is responsible for these rumors? Give me a break. END SIDEBAR
“I am offended by that statement,” Obama shot back, not letting the reporter finish his question. “There is no evidence at all that any of this involved us.”
“We don’t go after people’s families,” Obama said. “We don’t get them involved in the politics. It’s not appropriate and it’s not relevant. 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.”
That’s about as unequivocal as you can get.
Meanwhile, politicos are clucking about what McCain knew about the pregnancy and when he knew it while seemingly marveling at the idea that evangelicals would “stand by” the Palin family in the face of this news.
Of course, liberal social activists will take advantage of this situation by writing all sorts of columns and blog posts about how Bristol Palin is the epitome of the failure of abstinence education and pro-life philosophy, both of which her mother has supported as a public official.
And it’s too bad, because they’ll be too busy judging Bristol and her family to notice Bristol’s family standing by her as she raises her baby boy or girl, and they’ll be too preoccupied with pontificating to the rest of us to realize that Bristol’s situation is exactly why social conservatives believe so strongly in abstinence education and pro-life policies.
